571  fr  BEACON  LIGHTS 
of  PROPHECY 


.LBERTC.KNUDSON  A9 


»    M       .8.K74- 


BY  THE  SAME  AUTHOR 


The  Old  Testament  Problem 


i6mo.      Net,  25  centa 


■'UN    8  19] 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS 
OF  PROPHECY 


AN  INTERPRETATION  OF 

AMOS,  HOSEA,  ISAIAH,  JEREMIAH, 
EZEKIEL,    AND     DEUTERO-ISAIAH 


ALBERT    C.   KNUDSON 

Professor  in  Boston  University  School  of  Theology 


NEW    YORK:   EATON     &     MAINS 
CINCINNATI :  JENNINGS  &  GRAHAM 


Copyright,  IQ14,  by 
ALBERT  C.   KNUDSON 


TO 

M.  J.  K. 


PREFACE 

These  lectures  are  intended  primarily  for  the 
preacher  and  layman,  not  the  professional  bib- 
lical scholar.  Questions  of  literary  criticism  are 
consequently  either  passed  over  altogether  or 
dealt  with  very  briefly.  The  main  conclusions  of 
modern  biblical  scholarship  are  assumed  and 
occasionally  stated,  but  not  discussed.  What  is 
aimed  at  is  a  vital  interpretation  of  the  prophetic 
movement  and  especially  its  six  greatest  literary 
representatives. 

The  standpoint  here  represented  differs  in  one 
regard  from  the  current  view.  It  is  here  held 
that  eschatology  preceded  literary  prophecy 
instead  of  the  reverse.  There  is,  therefore,  no 
valid  ground  for  eliminating  the  Messianic  pas- 
sages from  the  writings  of  the  preexilic  prophets. 
These  men  were  not  merely  preachers  of  repent- 
ance. They  were  heralds  of  the  coming  king- 
dom of  God.  They  believed  profoundly  in  a 
marvelous  and  not  distant  manifestation  of  Je- 
hovah in  doom  and  redemption.  This  manifes- 
tation was  to  be  final  and  to  mark  a  new  era  in 
the  history  of  mankind.  Only  as  this  fact  is 
recognized,  can  the  intense  passion  of  the  prophets 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

be  fully  understood.  It  was  not  simply  his- 
torical forces  and  temporal  conditions  with  which 
they  dealt.  The  religious  leverage  of  their  mes- 
sage is  to  be  found  in  their  eschatological  out- 
look. 

I  am  deeply  indebted  to  the  Rev.  Lucius  H. 
Bugbee,  D.D.,  for  reading  the  manuscript  and 
making  a  number  of  valuable  suggestions. 

Albert  C.  Knudson. 


CONTENTS 

Chapter  I 

PAGE 

The  History  and  Nature  of  Prophecy i 

Importance  of  Hebrew  prophecy,  p.  i — The  rank  and 
file  of  the  prophetic  order,  p.  2 — The  prophetic  bands 
in  the  time  of  Samuel,  p.  2 — The  prophetic  guilds  in 
the  time  of  Elijah,  p.  6 — Deterioration  of  the  prophetic 
order,  and  rise  of  the  false  prophets,  p.  7 — Preliterary 
prophets,  p.  10 — Relation  of  Moses  to  prophecy,  p.  11 — 
Samuel,  p.  12 — Nathan,  Gad,  and  Ahijah,  p.  15 — Elijah, 
p.  16 — Elisha,  p.  19 — Literary  prophets,  p.  19 — Cause 
of  the  rise  of  literary  prophecy,  p.  20 — Relation  of  the 
literary  prophets  to  their  predecessors  and  the  political 
developments  of  their  own  time,  p.  21 — Classification  of 
the  literary  prophets,  p.  26 — Nature  of  prophecy,  p.  28 — 
The  Hebrew  terms  for  prophet  and  their  relation  to  the 
idea  of  prediction,  p.  28 — Prophecy  as  compared  with 
divination,  p.  31 — Fundamental  difference  between  the 
prophet  and  diviner,  p.  36 — Clairvoyant  quality  of  the 
prophetic  mind  and  possible  reasons  therefor,  p.  39 — 
Comparison  of  Hebrew  prophets  with  Greek  philosophers, 
p.  45 — Function  of  prophet  and  priest  contrasted,  p.  49 
— Differences  between  prophet  and  apocalyptist,  p.  50 — 
The  eschatological  element  in  the  teaching  of  the  literary 
prophets  and  its  importance,  p.  52 — The  prophets  not 
merely  preachers  of  repentance  but  heralds  of  a  new 
kingdom,  p.  55. 

Chapter  II 

Amos  the  Prophet  of  Moral  Law 56 

His  present  distinction  due  to  the  work  of  modern 
critics,  p.  56 — -His  home  and  its  influence  upon  his  mental 

ix 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

PAGE 

development,  p.  60 — Relation  of  his  message  of  doom 
to  Judah,  p.  61 — His  occupation  and  its  bearing  on  his 
intellectual  life,  p.  63 — His  prophetic  call,  p.  65 — Sig- 
nificance of  his  message  of  doom,  p.  67 — Analysis  of 
the  book,  p.  71 — The  impending  ruin  as  described  by- 
Amos,  p.  72 — The  popular  trust  in  ceremonialism  and 
Israel's  election,  p.  77 — Moral  evils  of  the  day,  p.  81 — 
Righteousness  the  one  requirement  of  Jehovah,  p.  82 — 
Amos  9.  8-15  not  the  work  of  a  later  hand,  p.  84. 

Chapter  III 

Hosea  the  Prophet  of  Love 89 

The  importance  of  Hosea,  like  that  of  Amos,  a  modern 
discovery,  p.  89 — Political  conditions  during  his  time, 
p.  92 — His  home,  p.  94 — His  relation  to  the  priesthood, 
p.  96 — The  story  of  his  marriage  and  its  interpretation, 
p.  97 — Relation  of  his  marriage  to  his  prophetic  call, 
p.  102 — Teaching  and  structure  of  chs.  1-3,  p.  104 — 
Analysis  of  chs.  4-14,  p.  106 — The  prophet's  message 
of  doom  and  its  significance,  p.  107 — The  moral  evils 
of  his  day,  p.  no — The  corrupt  worship,  p.  in — Hosea 's 
denunciation  of  foreign  alliances,  p.  115 — His  antipathy 
to  the  monarchy,  p.  116 — Israel's  cardinal  sin,  p.  117 — 
Jehovah's  love  for  Israel,  p.  119 — The  prophet's  message 
of  hope,  p.  121. 

Chapter  IV 

Isaiah  the  Prophet  of  Faith 125 

Reasons  for  Isaiah's  preeminence  among  the  prophets, 
p.  125 — His  home  and  family,  p.  127 — His  prophetic  call, 
p.  128 — The  historical  background  of  his  ministry,  p.  131 
— Interview  with  Ahaz,  p.  135 — Scenes  illustrating  the 
prophet's  opposition  to  rebellion  against  Assyria,  p.  136 
— Isaiah's  attitude  toward  Assyria,  p.  141 — Analysis  of 
the  book,  p.  143 — Moral  and  religious  condition  of  Judah, 
p.  146 — Points  of  resemblance  between  Isaiah  and  the 
two    preceding    prophets,    p.    147 — Isaiah    a    religious 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

teacher,  not  a  practical  statesman,  p.  150 — Inviolability 
of  Jerusalem,  p.  155 — Doctrine  of  the  remnant,  p.  156 
— The  Messianic  prophecies,  p.  157 — Interpretation  of 
Isa.  7.  14-17,  p.  160. 

Chapter  V 

Jeremiah  the  Prophet  of  Personal  Piety 165 

Teaching  and  influence  of  Jeremiah  as  compared 
with  that  of  the  preceding  prophets,  p.  165 — His 
prophetic  call,  p.  169 — Political  background  of  his  min- 
istry, p.  172 — The  Scythian  invasion,  p.  174 — Jeremiah's 
relation  to  the  Deuteronomic  reform,  p.  176 — His  ex- 
periences during  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  p.  179 — Reign 
of  Zedekiah  and  fall  of  Jerusalem,  p.  182 — Origin  and 
analysis  of  the  book  of  Jeremiah,  p.  184 — Jeremiah's 
message  of  doom,  p.  185 — Moral  and  religious  condi- 
tions during  his  time,  p.  188 — His  conception  of  human 
nature  and  of  the  need  of  a  radical  change  of  character, 
p.  189 — Message  of  hope,  p.  191 — The  Messiah  and  new 
covenant,  p.  193 — Jeremiah's  self-revelations,  p.  195 — 
His  suffering,  p.  196 — His  attitude  toward  God,  p.  198. 

Chapter  VI 

Ezekiel  the  Prophet  of  Individualism 202 

The  priestly  element  in  Ezekiel's  work  and  its  sig- 
nificance, p.  202 — Relation  of  his  teaching  to  that  of 
Jeremiah,  p.  205 — His  life,  p.  207 — Prophetic  call,  p.  207 
— Absolute  sovereignty  of  Jehovah,  p.  210 — Ezekiel's 
sternness,  p.  211 — His  commission,  p.  213 — His  visions, 
p.  215 — Was  he  a  cataleptic?  p.  216 — His  symbolical 
actions,  p.  219 — Evidence  that  he  had  an  active  min- 
istry and  was  not  merely  a  writer,  p.  221 — Analysis 
of  the  book,  p.  224 — Ezekiel's  message  of  doom  as  com- 
pared with  that  of  the  preceding  prophets,  p.  225 — The 
sins  of  Israel,  p.  226 — Message  of  hope,  p.  228 — Sig- 
nificance of  chs.  38-39,  p.  229 — Interpretation  of  chs. 
40-48,  p.  230 — Israel's  future  according  to  chs.  34-37, 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

PAGE 

p.    231 — Anticipations    of    Pauline   teaching,    p.   234 — 
Doctrine  of  individualism,  p.  235. 

Chapter  VII 

Deutero-Isaiah  the  Prophet  of  Universalism 240 

Reasons  for  detaching  Isa.  40-66  from  the  rest  of 
the  book,  p.  240 — Relation  of  Deutero-Isaiah  to  Isaiah, 
p.  241 — Authorship  of  chs.  56-66,  p.  243 — Deutero- 
Isaiah's  home  and  ministry,  p.  244 — Conflicting  views 
concerning  his  date  and  the  theme  of  his  book,  p.  246 
— Objections  to  a  post-exilic  date,  p.  250 — Eschato- 
logical  element  in  Deutero-Isaiah,  p.  253 — His  message 
almost  exclusively  one  of  hope,  p.  255 — Restoration  of 
the  exiles  and  inauguration  of  a  new  era  in  the  history 
of  the  world,  p.  259 — Jehovah  as  sole  deity,  the  eternal 
and  transcendent  Creator  of  heaven  and  earth,  p.  262 — 
Jehovah  as  a  God  of  grace,  p.  265 — Cyrus,  p.  266 — 
Israel  outside  of  the  servant-passages,  p.  267 — The 
Suffering  Servant;  p.  269 — Deutero- Isaiah's  universal- 
ism, p.  274. 

Index  of  Scripture  Passages 278 


CHAPTER  1 
THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

Prophecy  is  the  supreme  gift  of  Israel  to  the 
world.  There  is  nothing  comparable  to  it  in  the 
religious  history  of  mankind.  Other  peoples 
have  had  their  great  religious  teachers :  the 
Hindus  their  Buddha,  the  Persians  their  Zoro- 
aster, the  Arabians  their  Mohammed.  But 
nowhere  do  we  find  a  succession  of  men  extend- 
ing over  several  centuries  of  time,  who  enter- 
tained such  lofty  conceptions  of  religion,  devoted 
themselves  with  such  passion  and  power  to  the 
realization  of  these  conceptions,  and  contributed 
so  much  to  the  permanent  moralization  and  spir- 
itualization  of  religion,  as  did  the  prophets  of 
Israel.  These  men  occupy  a  unique  place  in 
religious  history.  To  them  more  than  to  any 
other  group  of  men  the  world  is  indebted  for  its 
richest  and  noblest  spiritual  treasure. 

In  the  following  chapters  we  are  to  study  six 
of  the  greatest  of  these  prophets.  But  prelimi- 
nary to  these  special  studies,  it  is  necessary  that  we 
give  some  account  both  of  the  history  and  nature 
of  prophecy  in  general.  We  begin  with  the  his- 
tory. 


A 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

History  of  Prophecy 

Prophecy  in  the  Old  Testament  is  by  no  means 
a  simple  phenomenon.  It  contains  different  and 
even  discordant  elements.  First,  we  may  dis- 
tinguish the  rank  and  file  of  the  prophetic  order. 
These  prophets  come  into  special  prominence  at 
two  important  crises  of  the  nation's  history — 
during  the  Philistine  wars  of  the  eleventh  cen- 
tury and  the  Syrian  wars  of  the  ninth  century. 
But  they  are  frequently  referred  to  by  the  canon- 
ical prophets,  and  appear  as  late  as  the  time  of 
Nehemiah  (6.  10-14).  It  is  probable,  then,  that 
they  formed  a  continuous  institution  in  Israel,  at 
least  from  the  eleventh  century  before  Christ 
down  into  the  postexilic  period. 

Groups  or  bands  of  prophets  first  appear  in  the 
time  of  Samuel  (1  Sam.  10.  5-13).  They  then 
apparently  moved  about  the  country  devoting 
themselves  to  a  rather  extravagant  type  of  reli- 
gious life.  They  carried  musical  instruments 
with  them,  and  by  means  of  music  and  song  seem 
to  have  worked  themselves  up  into  a  state  of 
frenzy.  Indeed,  so  conspicuous  a  feature  of  their 
life  was  this  physical  excitement  that  thev  were 
called  madmen  (2  Kings  9.  11;  Hos.  9.  7),  and 
the  verb  "prophesy"  came  to  be  used  in  the  sense 
of  "rave"  (1  Sam.  18.  10).  They  were  thus 
ecstatics,  resembling  to  a  certain  extent  modern 
dervishes  and  the  ancient  Greek  worshipers  of 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

Dionysus.  They  also  bore  some  resemblance  to 
the  prophets  of  Baal  as  described  in  1  Kings 
1 8.  25-29.  The  latter  fact  has  led  to  the 
theory  that  prophecy  was  not  an  independent 
institution  in  Israel  but  was  borrowed  from 
the  Canaanites.  In  support  of  this  view  it  is 
claimed  that  the  Hebrew  word  for  "prophet," 
nabi,  was  of  foreign  origin.  But  this  claim 
is  without  adequate  foundation.  There  is,  it 
is  true,  no  verbal  root  in  Hebrew  from  which 
nabi  could  have  been  derived ;  but  this  is  also 
true  of  many  other  Hebrew  words,  such  as 
those  for  "blood"  and  "priest,"  which  no  one 
thinks  of  regarding  as  loan-words.  Then,  too, 
the  name  nabi  is  applied  to  a  number  of  persons 
before  the  time  of  Samuel,  such  as  Abraham 
(Gen.  20.  7,  17),  Moses  (Deut.  34.  10),  Mir- 
iam (Exod.  15.  20),  and  Deborah  (Judg. 
4.  4).  This  does  not  necessarily  mean  that  these 
persons  were  called  prophets  in  their  own  time. 
We  may  have  here  simply  the  view  of  a  later 
writer.  But  his  view  would  be  significant  as 
representing  the  thought  of  his  own  day.  It  is 
also  in  harmony  with  Amos  2.  nf.  and  Jer.  7. 
25,  where  it  is  implied  that  there  was  a  contin- 
uous succession  of  prophets  from  the  time  of 
Moses  down.  Further,  there  is  no  indication 
anywhere  in  the  Old  Testament  that  Hebrew 
prophecy  was  ever  looked  upon  as  having  any 

3 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

connection  whatsoever  with  the  Canaanites. 
Everything  points  in  the  opposite  direction. 
The  prophets,  for  instance,  are  in  several  cases 
(Amos  2.  ii  ;  2  Kings  10.  i5ff. ;  and  Jer.  35) 
brought  into  close  relation  with  the  Nazirites 
and  Rechabites,  both  of  whom  represented  reac- 
tions against  Canaanitic  institutions  rather  than 
dependence  upon  them.  Likewise,  the  prophetic 
dress,  the  hairy  mantle,  points  back  to  the  wilder- 
ness period.  It  is,  then,  in  the  highest  degree 
probable  that  prophecy  in  Israel  goes  back  to  the 
very  beginning  of  the  nation's  history. 

But  while  prophecy  did  not  originate  in  the 
time  of  Samuel,  it  seems  to  have  received  a  new 
impulse  and  to  have  undergone  a  marked  develop- 
ment in  his  day.  For  one  thing,  it  took  on  the 
character  of  a  group  movement.  Previously,  it 
seems  to  have  been  confined  to  individuals.  Here 
and  there  a  person  was  seized  with  the  Spirit  of 
God  (compare  Judg.  5.  12;  6.  34;  14.  6,  19). 
But  in  the  time  of  Samuel  whole  groups  of  men 
were  thus  affected.  The  prophetic  spirit  became 
contagious.  The  reason  for  this  new  develop- 
ment was  probably  the  national  and  religious 
crisis  brought  on  by  the  victories  of  the  Philis- 
tines. The  ark  had  been  captured,  Shiloh  dese- 
crated, and  the  land  in  large  part  subdued.  It 
was  natural  that  this  critical  state  of  affairs 
should    awaken    intense    excitement,    and    that 

4 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

whole  bodies  of  men  should  now  be  swept  away 
by  the  same  spirit  of  ecstasy  which  had  hereto- 
fore laid  hold  only  of  individuals.  Then,  too, 
this  group  movement  tended  to  make  the  prophets 
more  aggressive.  Previously  they  seem  to  have 
waited  for  people  to  call  upon  them,  simply  an- 
swering such  questions  as  were  asked.  Now 
they  take  the  offensive.  They  enter  into  the  life 
of  the  people  and  seek  to  direct  the  course  of 
events.  They  thus  become  a  new  and  signifi- 
cant factor  in  the  history  of  the  nation. 

Furthermore,  it  seems  not  improbable  that  a 
change  took  place  at  this  time  in  the  content  of 
their  teaching.  Previously  they  had  dealt  chiefly 
with  the  present ;  now  they  begin  to  deal  more 
and  more  with  the  future,  and  not  only  with  de- 
tails of  the  future,  but  with  the  whole  future  de- 
velopment of  the  kingdom  of  Jehovah.  In  a 
word,  their  message  becomes  eschatological.  To 
some  extent  this  outlook  into  the  future  is  inher- 
ent in  the  very  nature  of  religion,  and  so  must 
have  been  at  least  implicit  in  the  work  of  Moses. 
But  the  ecstatic  character  of  the  prophetic  move- 
ment in  the  time  of  Samuel  naturally  tended  to 
bring  it  into  prominence.  For  ecstasy  thrives  on  ^ ' 
the  contrast  between  the  real  and  the  ideal,  and 
on  the  expectation  of  the  speedy  realization  of  -' 
the  ideal.  Traces  of  this  early  eschatology  are 
probably  to  be  found  in  Num.  23  and  24 ;  2  Sam. 

5 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

7.  8-16;  and  Gen.  49.  8-12.  But  the  clearest  evi- 
dence of  its  existence  is  furnished  by  the  later 
written  prophecies.  These  prophecies  contain 
eschatological  conceptions  which  were  manifestly 
not  original  with  the  canonical  prophets  them- 
selves. They  also  contain  allusions  to  eschato- 
logical ideas  current  among  the  people  (Amos  5. 
18;  Isa.  28.  15).  The  origin  of  these  conceptions 
must,  then,  be  found  in  the  period  anterior  to  the 
eighth  century  before  Christ,  and,  if  so,  it  is  most 
naturally  to  be  looked  for  in  the  early  prophetic 
circles. 

During  the  two  centuries  intervening  between 
Samuel  and  Elijah  we  have  no  reference  to 
the  prophetic  bands.  Nevertheless,  during  this 
period  they  seem  to  have  grown  in  importance 
and  influence.  In  the  time  of  Elijah  we  find  four 
hundred  of  them  at  the  court  of  Ahab  (1  Kings 
22.  5ff. ).  The  pious  chamberlain,  Obadiah,  hid 
one  hundred  of  them  from  the  wrath  of  Jezebel 
(1  Kings  18.  13).  They  were  located  at  various 
places  throughout  the  land — Gilgal,  Bethel, 
Jericho,  and  Samaria.  From  being  itinerant 
bands  they  had  now  become  settled  colonies. 
They  were  known  as  "sons  of  the  prophets," 
which  means  that  they  formed  guilds  or  corpora- 
tions. They  lived  together,  had  their  meals  in 
common,  and  some  of  them  at  least  were  married 
(2  Kings  4.  1-7,  38-41).    They  seem  also  to  have 

6 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

been  under  the  direction  of  men  of  superior  spir- 
itual endowment,  such  as  Elijah  and  Elisha. 
This  no  doubt  tended  to  moderate  their  ecstatic 
excitement  and  to  direct  their  energies  along 
higher  and  more  fruitful  lines. 

One  naturally  wonders  what  the  members  of 
these  prophetic  guilds  busied  themselves  with 
from  day  to  day.  They  seem  to  have  been  sup- 
ported by  the  gifts  of  others  (i  Kings  14.  3; 
2  Kings  5.  15;  8,  9ft. ;  Amos  7.  12;  Mic.  3,  5), 
so  that  they  must  have  had  most  of  their  time  to 
themselves.  No  doubt  they  devoted  considerable 
attention  to  music  and  song  and  such  other  exer- 
cises as  would  prepare  them  to  receive  the  word 
of  Jehovah;  for  their  chief  function  was  to  de- 
clare the  divine  will  wherever  and  whenever  it  '- 
was  called  for  or  needed.  It  is  probable  also 
that,  like  the  Christian  monks,  they  interested 
themselves  in  literature.  The  history  of  the 
nation  would  naturally  have  its  important  les- 
sons for  them.  They  therefore  cherished  the 
traditions  handed  down  from  the  past.  Then, 
too,  they  probably  devoted  themselves  with  spe- 
cial interest  to  the  future,  the  development  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  the  plan  of  Jehovah.  This, 
indeed,  seems  to  have  been  their  peculiar  sphere, 
the  main  theme  of  their  reflections. 

Like    all    similar    institutions,    the    prophetic 
guilds  were  exposed  to  the  danger  of  corruption. 

7 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

This  grew  partly  out  of  the  fact  that  they  were 
dependent  for  their  support  upon  the  gifts  of 
others.  They  were  consequently  in  danger  of 
delivering  such  messages  as  would  serve  their 
own  selfish  ends.  To  those  who  supplied  their 
wants  they  cried,  "Peace,"  but  against  those  who 
refused  to  do  so  they  prepared  war  (Mic.  3.  5). 
This  seems  to  have  been  a  serious  evil  in  the 
time  of  the  canonical  prophets,  though,  judging 
from  the  story  of  Gehazi  (2  Kings  5.  2off.),  it 
was  probably  not  unknown  in  earlier  times. 
Then,  again,  there  was  danger  of  formalism  and 
professionalism.  Prophecy  had  had  its  origin  in 
intense  earnestness.  The  ecstatic  excitement  of 
the  early  prophets  had  been,  in  large  part  at  least, 
an  expression  of  genuine  enthusiasm.  This  was 
no  doubt  also  the  case  with  the  later  prophets  in 
seasons  of  peril  and  special  urgency.  But  at 
other  times  their  excited  demeanor  was  prob- 
ably cultivated  in  an  artificial  way  and  so  came  to 
be  chiefly  neurotic  in  character  with  little  if  any 
spiritual  element  in  it.  The  prophetic  order  thus 
deteriorated,  losing  the  moral  power  it  once 
possessed. 

Hence  when  we  come  to  the  eighth  century  we 
find  a  sharp  cleavage  in  the  ranks  of  the  prophets. 
A  foreshadowing  of  this  cleavage  appears  in  the 
case  of  Micaiah  and  the  four  hundred  prophets 
who  gathered  about  Ahab    (1    Kings  22.   5ff.). 

8 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

But  not  until  a  century  later  did  the  cleavage 
become  serious.  It  then  gave  rise  to  what  are 
known  as  the  false  prophets,  who  are  referred  to 
again  and  again  in  the  prophetic  books.  These 
prophets  are  commonly  opposed  to  the  canonical 
prophets,  but  this  does  not  mean  that  they 
embraced  all  of  the  lower  rank  of  prophets. 
Many  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  prophetic  order 
were  true  prophets  of  Jehovah,  and  were  ready 
to  seal  with  their  blood  their  loyalty  to  the  truth 
(2  Kings  9.  7;  21.  10-16;  Jer.  26.  20-23).  As 
over  against  these,  however,  there  were  large 
numbers  who  fell  under  the  baneful  influences 
of  professionalism,  divining  for  money,  and  still 
others  who  unconsciously  yielded  to  the  dominant 
national  spirit,  allowing  themselves  to  be  blinded 
by  the  hopes  and  wishes  of  the  people. 

Prophets  of  this  type  naturally  contradicted 
the  gloomy  messages  of  the  canonical  prophets, 
announcing  peace  when  there  was  no  peace  and 
encouraging  hope  when  there  was  no  hope. 
Hence  they  are  called  false  prophets.  This,  how-  X 
ever,  does  not  mean  that  they  were  intentional 
deceivers.  They  were,  rather,  self-deceived. 
This  was  possible  because  true  prophecy  had  in 
the  course  of  centuries  undergone  a  change.  At 
the  outset  it  was  both  national  and  ethical.  Later 
it  became  almost  exclusively  ethical.  But  this 
change  was   not    accepted  by   all   the  prophets; 

9 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

many  reacted  against  its  apparently  antinational 
tendency,  and  in  so  doing  were  perfectly  sincere. 
While,  then,  they  were  really  prophesying  "out 
of  their  own  heart,"  and  following  their  own 
spirit  without  having  seen  anything  (Ezek.  13. 
2ff. ),  they  themselves  thought  they  were  declar- 
ing the  true  word  of  Jehovah.  It  was  so  in  the 
case  of  the  four  hundred  prophets  who  encour- 
aged Ahab  to  go  up  to  Ramoth-Gilead  against  the 
Syrians — a  fact  which  Micaiah  himself  acknowl- 
edges in  an  indirect  way  by  ascribing  their  mes- 
sage to  a  lying  spirit  which  Jehovah  had  placed 
in  their  mouth  (1  Kings  22.  22).  It  was  prob- 
ably so  also  in  the  case  of  Hananiah,  who,  in 
opposition  to  Jeremiah,  incited  revolt  against 
Nebuchadrezzar,  predicting  that  within  two  years 
the  Babylonian  yoke  would  be  broken  (Jer.  28). 
"If,"  says  Ezekiel,  "the  prophet  be  deceived  and 
speak  a  word,  I,  Jehovah,  have  deceived  that 
prophet"  (14.  9).  It  is  impossible,  then,  to 
regard  all  the  so-called  false  prophets  as 
impostors.  They,  rather,  represent  a  lower  type 
of  prophecy,  which,  like  true  prophecy,  began 
with  the  fusion  of  national  and  ethical  interests, 
but  which,  unlike  true  prophecy,  allowed  the 
national  to  predominate  over  the  ethical. 

From  the  rank  and  file  of  the  prophetic  order 
we  now  turn  to  those  individual  prophets  who 

10 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

stand  out  conspicuously  in  the  history  and  liter- 
ature of  Israel.  These  men  are  usually  divided 
into  two  classes — the  literary  and  preliterary 
prophets.  The  former  correspond  to  our  canon- 
ical prophets;  the  latter  are  the  distinguished 
prophets  of  earlier  times,  of  whom  we  have  ac- 
counts in  the  historical  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment.   We  take  up  the  latter  first. 

Of  the  preliterary  prophets  there  are  two  of 
special  importance — Samuel  and  Elijah.  To 
them  we  shall  devote  chief  attention.  But  be- 
fore taking  them  up  we  need  to  consider  the 
relation  of  Moses  to  prophecy.  He  is  himself 
referred  to  as  a  prophet  in  Hos.  12.  13,  and  in 
Dent.  18.  15,  18  is  spoken  of  as  a  representative 
of  the  highest  type  of  a  prophet.  There  can  also 
be  no  doubt  that  he  was  imbued  with  the  true 
prophetic  spirit.  In  view  of  this,  one  might  be 
inclined  to  class  him  with  the  preliterary  prophets. 
But  to  do  so  would  be  to  misrepresent  his  true 
historical  position.  The  traditional  view  which 
distinguishes  him  from  the  prophets  is  justified. 
It  was  he  who  laid  the  foundation  of  Israel's 
national  and  religious  life.  Before  his  time  the 
Israelites  seem  to  have  been  polytheists.  They 
worshiped  nature  gods.  Moses  established  among 
them  the  worship  of  one  God,  Jehovah,  who  in 
a  marvelous  way  had  delivered  them  from  the 
Egyptians  and  thus  proven  himself  to  be  not  only 

11 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

a  God  of  nature  but  the  God  of  history.  Such 
a  wonderful  God  naturally  demanded  from  his 
people  complete  surrender  and  absolute  obedience. 
His  worship,  therefore,  was  in  essence  ethical 
from  the  outset  (Amos  2.  10;  5.  25;  Hos.  2.  15  ; 
9.  10;  Jer.  2.  2ff.).  It  was  also  imageless,  and 
the  conditions  of  the  time  made  it  centralized. 
We  have  consequently  in  the  work  of  Moses  the 
germ  of  the  whole  subsequent  religious  develop- 
ment in  Israel.  He  was  the  great  creative  per- 
sonality in  her  history.  He  opened  up  the  foun- 
tain from  which  the  later  stream  of  prophecy 
flowed  forth.  Or,  to  use  a  figure  borrowed  from 
Cornill,  the  prophets  simply  put  out  at  interest 
the  pound  they  inherited  from  Moses.  His  work 
was  the  presupposition  of  theirs. 

The  figure  of  Samuel  stands  out  conspicuously 
in  the  prophetic  narratives  of  the  Old  Testament. 
But  it  is  not  easy  to  determine  exactly  in  what 
his  significance  lay.  Some  have  tried  to  reduce 
him  to  a  "seer  of  a  small  town,  known  only  as  a 
clairvoyant,  whose  information  concerning  lost 
or  strayed  property  was  reliable."  But  his  repu- 
tation in  later  times  makes  it  incredible  that 
he  should  have  been  such  an  humble  personage. 
Moreover,  there  are  indications  in  the  very  ear- 
liest narratives  (1  Sam.  9.  1  to  10.  15;  it.  1-16) 
that  in  his  own  time  he  was  widely  known  and 
had  a  mission  to  the  nation  as  well  as  to  individ- 

12 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

uals.  Saul's  uncle,  for  instance,  only  needs  to 
hear  his  name  mentioned  in  order  to  be  at  once 
interested  in  what  he  had  said  to  his  nephew 
(i  Sam.  10.  141.).  The  very  fact  also  that  Sam- 
uel anointed  Saul  to  be  king  is  evidence  that  his 
own  interests  were  by  no  means  local  and  private 
(1  Sam.  9.  11  ;  10.  1).  Accordingly  it  is  probable 
that  the  later  representations  of  him  and  his 
work  (2  Sam.  3.  igfi. ;  7;  8;  10.  17-27;  12; 
15)  have  a  substantial  historical  basis.  In 
any  case,  the  times  in  which  he  lived  were 
critical.  The  very  existence  of  the  nation 
was  at  stake.  And  under  those  circumstances 
it  was  he  who  first  saw  the  need  of  a  mon- 
archy as  the  one  way  of  saving  Israel  politi- 
cally, and  who  pointed  out  the  new  king.  He 
thus  introduced  a  new  era  in  the  history  of  Israel. 
He  brought  in  a  new  form  of  government,  and 
in  the  person  of  the  king  gave  an  outward  and 
visible  expression  to  the  religious  unity  of  the 
people. 

Much  stress  has  been  laid  upon  an  annotation 
found  in  1  Sam.  9.  9,  which  originally  belonged 
after  verse  11.  We  here  read  that  "Beforetime 
in  Israel,  when  a  man  went  to  inquire  of  God, 
thus  he  spake,  Come,  and  let  us  go  to  the  seer :  for 
he  that  is  now  called  a  Prophet  was  beforetime 
called  a  Seer."  From  this  it  is  inferred  that  the 
name  "prophet"  was  not  applied  to  Samuel  in 

13 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

his  own  day.  He  was  then  called  a  seer.  And 
it  is  true  that  he  is  to  be  distinguished  from  the 
members  of  the  prophetic  bands  of  his  day.  He 
was  a  different  kind  of  person.  None  of  their 
wild  frenzy  belonged  to  him.  He  was  a  calm, 
clear-sighted  man.  But  it  does  not  follow  from 
the  above  annotation  that  he  was  not  called  a 
prophet  (nabi)  by  the  people  of  his  own  time. 
All  that  can  be  justly  deduced  from  this  verse 
is  that  in  the  annotator's  day  it  was  customary 
to  say  "Let  us  go  to  the  prophet,"  and  not  "Let 
us  go  to  the  seer."  But  that  the  expression,  "Let 
us  go  to  the  prophet,"  was  not  used  in  Samuel's 
time  is  nowhere  stated.  The  probability,  as  we 
have  already  seen,  is  that  the  name  nabi  was  in 
current  use  before  his  day,  and  was  on  occasion 
applied  to  him  as  well  as  to  other  seers. 

Exactly  what  relation  Samuel  sustained  to  the 
prophetic  bands  of  his  time  is  not  certain.  In 
one  passage  (i  Sam.  19.  18-24)  he  is  represented 
as  standing  at  their  head,  but  this  passage  is 
usually  regarded  as  belonging  to  a  late  date  and 
as  not  strictly  historical.  That  he,  however,  had 
some  connection  with  them  is  a  priori  probable. 
He  may  to  some  extent  have  directed  their  activ- 
ities, as  did  Elijah  and  Elisha  later,  and  so  may 
have  used  them  in  furthering  his  own  national 
purposes.  In  any  case,  he  must  have  had  some 
way  of  bringing  his  influence  to  bear  upon  the 

14 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

religious  life  of  his  day.  For  the  situation  was 
critical  religiously  as  well  as  politically.  Under 
the  depressing  influence  of  Philistine  overlord- 
ship  there  was  clanger  of  syncretism  and  apostasy 
from  Jehovah.  Some  powerful  stimulus  was 
needed  to  guard  against  these  dangers.  And  if 
the  later  traditions  concerning  Samuel  have  any 
basis  in  fact,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  he  to  a 
large  extent  furnished  this  stimulus,  and  along 
with  it  quickened  the  national  consciousness  to 
a  point  where  it  was  ready  to  accept  the  leader- 
ship of  Saul  and  to  present  a  united  front  against 
the  Philistine  oppressor. 

Between  the  time  of  Samuel  and  that  of 
Elijah  we  have  the  prophets  Nathan,  Gad,  and 
Ahijah,  and  in  Elijah's  own  time  Micaiah. 
These  men  might  be  called  the  minor  prophets 
of  the  preliterary  period.  Very  little  is  recorded 
of  them.  But  from  what  has  come  down  to  us 
it  is  clear  that  they  stood  as  representatives  of 
the  morals,  customs,  and  faith  of  the  past.  They 
watched  with  suspicion  the  new  developments  in 
the  monarchy,  as  Samuel  also  seems  to  have  done 
(i  Sam.  15).  Anything  that  indicated  a  declin- 
ing faith  in  Jehovah  they  condemned.  For  this 
reason  Gad  denounced  the  census  taken  by  David 
(2  Sam.  24).  He  saw  in  it  a  tendency  on  the 
part  of  the  king  to  trust  unduly  in  his  newly  won 
political  power.     For  this  reason,   also,   Ahijah 

15 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

incited  Jeroboam  to  revolt  and  predicted  the 
division  of  the  monarchy,  (i  Kings  11.  29ff. ) 
This  division  was  a  penalty  for  the  worldly  and 
idolatrous  tendencies  of  Solomon's  reign.  We 
likewise  have  the  same  loyalty  to  the  righteous 
God  of  the  fathers  in  Nathan's  denunciation  of 
the  sin  of  David  (2  Sam.  12).  And  Micaiah's 
repeated  messages  of  evil  are  to  be  understood  as 
expressions  of  antagonism  to  Ahab's  violations 
of  established  right  and  faith. 

It  is  in  Elijah,  however,  that  this  attitude  of 
the  preliterary  prophets  comes  to  its  fullest  and 
most  striking  expression. 

There  are  three  scenes  in  his  life  that  stand 
out  conspicuously :  first,  his  conflict  with  Jezebel 
and  the  prophets  of  Baal  (1  Kings  18.  16-46); 
second,  his  journey  to  Horeb  the  mount  of  God 
(1  Kings  19.  1-18)  ;  and  third,  his  announcement 
of  doom  upon  the  royal  house  because  of  the 
judicial  murder  of  Naboth  (1  Kings  21).  In 
all  of  these  he  testifies  his  loyalty  to  the  God  of 
Sinai.  In  his  conflict  with  the  queen  he  reasserts 
the  ancient  jealousy  of  Jehovah,  a  jealousy  that 
would  brook  no  other  god  in  Israel,  and,  least  of 
all,  a  nature-god  like  the  Tyrian  Baal.  In  his  de- 
nunciation of  the  murder  of  Naboth  he  pro- 
claims again  the  righteousness  of  the  God  of 
the  fathers,  a  righteousness  that  guards  the  inter- 
ests of  all  and  knows  no  distinction  between  high 

16 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

and  low,  but  requires  obedience  from  all  alike. 
And  by  his  journey  to  the  mount  of  God  he  de- 
clares symbolically  that  the  aim  of  all  his  work 
is  to  defend  and  revive  the  law  and  faith  of  Sinai. 
But  while  Elijah  thus  harks  back  to  the  foun- 
der of  Israel's  religion,  his  own  teaching  was  not 
a  mere  revival  of  that  of  Moses.  Altered  con- 
ditions demanded  an  altered  message.  And  not 
only  was  this  the  case.  Religious  thought  in 
Israel  during  the  intervening  centuries  had  not 
been  at  a  standstill.  The  prophets  had  been  con- 
servers  of  the  past,  but  they  had  also  been  crea- 
tors of  new  conceptions  of  the  future.  Sinai 
had  not  been  to  them  a  Jacob's  pillow  to  sleep 
upon,  but  a  Jacob's  ladder  to  climb  by.  Conse- 
quently, we  are  not  surprised  to  find  new  ele- 
ments in  the  teaching  of  Elijah.  Unfortunately, 
the  reports  of  his  words  are  extremely  meager. 
But,  meager  as  they  are,  they  show  the  direction 
of  his  thought.  For  one  thing,  he  declares  that 
a  great  judgment  is  to  come  upon  the  people  be- 
cause of  their  apostasy.  When  this  judgment 
has  done  its  work  a  mere  remnant  will  be  left. 
This  was  the  content  of  the  "still  small  voice" 
that  came  to  the  prophet  at  Horeb  (i  Kings  19. 
9-18).  And  from  the  fact  that  the  king  calls 
him  the  "troubler  of  Israel"  (1  Kings  18.  17)  it 
may  be  inferred  that  this  message  of  doom  was 
one  that  fell  frequently  from  his  lips.     It  is  also 

17 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

probable  that  it  did  not  stand  alone  but  formed 
a  part  of  a  larger  conception,  that  of  a  plan  of 
God,  an  idea  that  was  basal  in  the  thought  of  the 
canonical  prophets. 

But  even  more  significant  than  Elijah's  message 
of  doom  was  his  attitude  toward  Baal.  It  is 
evident  from  the  ridicule  the  prophet  pours  upon 
Baal  that  he  does  not  believe  in  his  existence 
(i  Kings  18.  27).  Baal  is  a  mere  shadow.  And 
if  so,  the  conclusion  is  inevitable  that  all  other 
gods,  except  Jehovah,  are  mere  shadows.  They 
have  no  real  existence.  Jehovah  is  God  alone. 
Elijah  himself  probably  did  not  draw  this  theo- 
retical conclusion.  The  problem  that  confronted 
him  was  a  practical  one.  The  worship  of  the 
Tyrian  Baal  had  been  introduced  into  Israel  and 
had  aroused  the  wrath  of  Jehovah.  It  satisfied 
the  prophet's  purpose,  therefore,  to  declare  that 
Baal  was  no  god.  But  had  other  gods  appeared 
in  Israel,  it  is  certain  that  he  would  have  made 
the  same  declaration  concerning  them,  for  he 
had  the  firm  inner  conviction  that  there  was  no 
god  but  Jehovah  (1  Kings  18.  21).  This  con- 
viction was,  indeed,  implicit  in  the  teaching  of 
Moses.  But  a  special  occasion  was  needed  to 
call  it  forth,  and  this  occasion  was  furnished  bv 
the  apostasy  in  the  time  of  Ahab.  We  conclude, 
consequently,  that  Elijah  was  the  first  in  whom 
the  practical  monotheistic  conviction  came  to  clear 

18 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

expression.  He  elevated  Jehovah  above  all  other 
gods  into  a  category  by  himself.  And  not  only 
that :  he  also  elevated  him  so  completely  above 
his  own  people  that  their  fortunes  were  seen  to 
be  wholly  subordinate  to  his  purposes.  He  does 
not  exist  for  their  sakes,  but  they  exist  for  his 
sake.  Loyalty  to  him  is  more  important  than  the 
mere  existence  of  the  nation.  This  position 
taken  by  Elijah  is  the  high  point  of  preliterary 
prophecy.  It  implies  that  Mosaism  is  in  princi- 
ple a  world-religion. 

Important,  however,  as  is  the  place  of  Elijah 
in  the  history  of  religion,  he  does  not  himself 
seem  to  have  accomplished  much  in  the  way  of 
external  reform.  This  task  he  committed  to  his 
successor,  Elisha,  who  was  a  man  of  more  practi- 
cal turn  of  mind.  Elisha,  for  instance,  did  not 
hesitate  to  resort  to  conspiracy  to  accomplish  his 
ends  (2  Kings  9.  iff.).  He  instigated  the 
bloody  revolution  of  Jehu,  and  thus  swept  the 
house  of  Ahab  from  the  throne  and  extirpated 
the  worship  of  the  Tyrian  Baal  from  Israel. 

We  turn  now  to  the  literary  prophets.  This 
designation  of  the  canonical  prophets  is  mis- 
leading in  so  far  at  it  tends  to  create  the  impres- 
sion that  they  were  writers  rather  than  men  of 
action.  So  far  as  the  form  of  prophetic  activity 
is  concerned,  it  was  not  essentially  different  in 

19 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

their  case  from  what  it  had  been  in  the  case  of 
their  predecessors.  Speech  and  action  were  quite 
as  characteristic  of  them  as  of  the  earlier  prophets. 
That  they  reduced  their  sermons  to  writing  was 
simply  incidental  to  their  ministry.  But  it  proved 
to  be  a  very  important  incident.  No  single  fact 
connected  with  the  development  of  prophecy  was 
more  significant  for  the  future  of  religion  in 
Israel. 

Why  written  prophecy  originated  in  the  eighth 
century  before  Christ  is  a  question  to  which  dif- 
ferent answers  have  been  given.  Some  ascribe  it 
to  the  literary  tendency  of  the  age.  Others 
attribute  it  to  the  failure  of  the  prophets  to  ac- 
complish what  they  desired  by  the  spoken  word. 
"It  must,"  says  Budde,  "have  been  their  very  ill 
success,  the  unbelief  of  the  people,  that  above  all 
else  compelled  them  to  resort  to  the  pen."  In  both 
of  these  answers  there  is  more  or  less  of  truth- 
As  literature  came  to  be  generally  cultivated  and 
men  came  to  take  interest  and  pride  in  the  pro- 
ducts of  the  pen,  it  was  inevitable  that  the 
prophets,  who  were  conscious  of  having  a  vital 
message  to  their  countrymen,  should  not  content 
themselves  with  the  spoken  word,  but  should  re- 
duce their  utterances  to  written  form.  Then,  too, 
the  unbelief  of  the  people  furnished  them  a 
specific  occasion  for  so  doing.  This  motive  was 
not  wholly  lacking  before  their  time,  as  is  clear 
20 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

from  the  cases  of  Elijah  and  Micaiah;  and  it  is 
by  no  means  improbable  that  before  the  time  of 
Amos  there  were  written  prophecies  which  have 
been  lost.  But  in  the  eighth  century  the  unbelief 
of  the  people  seems  to  have  been  more  general 
and  more  aggressive  than  heretofore.  Evidence 
of  this  is  furnished  by  the  number  and  influence 
of  the  false  prophets.  It  was  natural,  as  a  result, 
that  the  true  prophets  like  Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah, 
and  Jeremiah  should  turn  to  the  future  for  vindi- 
cation (Isa.  30.  8f. ),  and  also  entertain  the  hope 
that  the  written  word  might  eventually  accom- 
plish what  the  spoken  word  had  failed  to  achieve 
(Jer.  36.  3). 

Another  and  more  important  question  with 
reference  to  the  eighth-century  prophets  has  to 
do  with  the  relation  of  their  teaching  to  that  of 
their  predecessors.  It  is  evident  to  the  most  cas- 
ual reader  that  we  have  in  Amos,  Hosea,  and 
Isaiah  a  very  different  emphasis  from  that  which 
we  find  in  the  accounts  of  the  ninth-century 
prophets.  The  great  question  at  issue  in  the  time 
of  Elijah  was  whether  Jehovah,  and  he  alone, 
was  to  be  worshiped  in  Israel.  The  problem,  on 
the  other  hand,  with  which  the  literary  prophets 
deal  is  the  question  how  he  is  to  be  worshiped. 
This  change  of  emphasis  was  perhaps  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  uprooting  of  Baal  worship  did  not 
bring  about  the  improvement  expected.     Indeed. 

21 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

from  the  material  point  of  view,  conditions  soon 
afterward  grew  worse.  Israel  suffered  her  deep- 
est abasement  at  the  hands  of  Syria  in  the  reigns 
of  Jehu  and  Jehoahaz.  Hence  it  may  naturally 
have  been  concluded  that  what  Jehovah  required 
of  Israel  was  not  only  that  he,  and  he  only,  be 
worshiped,  but  that  he  be  worshiped  in  the  right 
way.  Not  sacrifices  and  burnt  offerings,  but  good- 
ness and  the  knowledge  of  God  was  what  he  de- 
manded. Almost  exclusive  stress  was  conse- 
quently placed  by  the  eighth-century  prophets 
upon  righteousness  as  the  one  condition  of  salva- 
tion. 

This  possible  historical  connection  between  the 
literary  and  preliterary  prophets  is,  however,  a 
point  of  subordinate  interest.  The  important 
question  relates  to  the  degree  of  originality  to  be 
ascribed  to  the  literary  prophets.  How  far  does 
their  teaching  mark  an  advance  beyond  that  of 
their  predecessors?  The  tendency  among  Old 
Testament  scholars  of  the  past  generation  has 
been  to  exalt  the  prophets  of  the  eighth  century 
far  above  their  predecessors  and  to  regard  them 
as  the  real  creators  of  the  higher  spiritual  element 
in  Israel's  religion.  But  this  view  is  a  mistaken 
conclusion  drawn  from  the  fact  that  we  have  a 
far  more  intimate  knowledge  of  the  teaching  of 
the  literary  prophets  than  of  that  of  their  pre- 
decessors. The  accounts  of  the  earlier  prophets  in 

22 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

the  historical  books  are  utterly  inadequate.  This 
is  evident  from  what  is  recorded  in  Second  Kings 
concerning  the  eighth-century  prophets.  Amos, 
Hosea,  and  Micah  are  not  even  mentioned,  and 
the  account  of  Isaiah  fails  altogether  to  give  us 
a  proper  insight  into  the  lofty  spirituality  of  his 
thought.  We  cannot,  as  a  consequence,  fairly 
judge  the  teaching  of  the  preliterary  prophets  by 
what  we  find  in  the  historical  books.  If  they  had 
left  us  written  reports  of  their  utterances,  the 
probability  is  we  would  find  that  they  anticipated 
to  a  large  extent  the  teaching  of  their  literary 
successors.  Such  is  certainly  the  conclusion 
favored  by  a  study  of  the  canonical  prophets 
themselves.  They  betray  no  consciousness  of 
being  innovators.  They  give  no  indication  of 
any  break  with  the  past.  Indeed,  the  very  re- 
verse is  the  case.  Theirs  are  "the  old  paths, 
where  is  the  good  way"  (Jer.  6.  16).  They  are 
by  nature  conservative,  as  are  all  deeply  religious 
men.  What  they  aim  to  do  is  not  to  introduce 
new  ideas  but  simply  to  call  the  people  back  to 
their  old  allegiance  to  Jehovah.  In  a  word,  they 
are  reformers. 

But  it  does  not  follow  from  this  that  there  was 
nothing  new  in  their  teaching.  All  great  reform- 
ers are  also  creative  geniuses.  The  adaptation 
of  any  great  and  pregnant  truth  of  the  past  to 
new  conditions  always  requires  original  insight. 

23 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

So  it  was  with  the  eighth-century  prophets. 
They  attached  themselves  unequivocally  to  the 
past.  At  the  same  time  their  teaching"  marked 
an  important  step  forward.  This  forward  step 
did  not  consist  so  much  in  the  introduction  of 
new  ideas  as  in  the  ethical  deepening  and  clearer 
definition  of  ideas  and  convictions  already  pres- 
ent. It  was  so  with  their  message  of  doom,  with 
their  conception  of  the  ethical  character  of  true 
religion,  and  with  their  monotheism.  These 
ideas  were  not  new,  but  they  were  given  a  clear- 
ness of  expression,  a  depth  of  interpretation,  and 
a  wideness  of  application  that  had  been  unknown 
before.  Consequently,  we  have  in  the  work  of 
the  eighth-century  prophets  a  notable  advance  in 
the  direction  of  a  complete  release  of  Israelitic 
religion  from  national  entanglements  and  its  pre- 
paration for  a  world-wide  mission.  But  this 
development  was  all  so  natural  that  there  was 
no  conscious  break  with  the  past.  Had  a  pious 
Israelite  of  earlier  times  been  permitted  to  read 
the  prophecies  of  Amos,  Hosea,  and  Isaiah,  he 
would  have  said,  as  did  a  Mohammedan  woman 
after  reading  a  Christian  book  of  devotion, 
"Why,  that  is  what  I  have  been  trying  to  say  all 
my  life."  Literary  prophecy  simply  voiced  the 
true  piety  of  the  past,  brought  it  to  self-conscious- 
ness, and  gave  it  clearness  of  expression.  It  was 
thus  merely  the  logical  outcome  of  that  higher 

24 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

faith  which  had  been  current  in  Israel  from  the 
time  of  Moses  down.  This  fact,  however,  de- 
tracts little,  if  any,  from  its  significance.  The 
appearance  of  the  literary  prophets  marks  the 
most  important  epoch  in  Israel's  history  next  to 
that  of  Moses. 

The  enlargement  of  religious  outlook  intro- 
duced by  the  eighth-century  prophets  was  closely 
connected  with  the  political  developments  of  the 
time,  and  from  one  point  of  view  may  be  re- 
garded as  evoked  by  them.  Not  until  Assyria 
appeared  on  the  borders  of  Israel  did  it  become  a 
practical  necessity  to  relate  the  power  of  Jehovah 
to  the  great  world-empires,  and  not  until  then 
could  the  idea  of  a  world-religion  have  naturally 
taken  root  in  prophetic  thought.  But  from  an- 
other point  of  view,  the  appearance  of  the  idea 
of  the  universal  sway  of  Jehovah  stands  in  strik- 
ing contrast  with  the  political  developments  of 
the  time.  Had  something  approaching  monothe- 
ism appeared  in  Egypt  and  Assyria,  it  would  not 
have  been  strange,  for  these  kingdoms  were 
practically  world-powers,  and  under  those  cir- 
cumstances it  would  have  been  only  natural  for 
the  religious  teachers  of  either  land  to  conclude 
that  their  chief  god  was  God  of  all  the  world. 
But  that  this  idea  should  appear  in  two  such  small 
kingdoms  as  Israel  and  Judah,  and  that  it  should 
be  proclaimed  in  them  with  such  perfect  confi- 

25 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

dence  at  the  very  time  they  were  going  down  to 
their  ruin,  is  one  of  the  most  remarkable  facts  in 
the  religious  history  of  mankind.  It  has  no 
parallel,  and  is  so  contrary  to  what  we  should 
naturally  expect  from  the  human  mind  and  heart 
that  one  can  hardly  resist  the  conviction  that  it 
must  to  a  special  degree  have  been  due  to  the 
Spirit  of  the  living  God. 

The  literary  prophets  may  be  conveniently  ar- 
ranged in  three  groups :  first,  those  who  appeared 
shortly  before  the  fall  of  Samaria  in  B.  C.  721 ; 
second,  those  who  prophesied  shortly  before  the 
fall  of  Jerusalem  in  B.  C.  586;  and,  third,  the 
prophets  of  the  Restoration  and  the  postexilic 
period.  To  the  first  class  belong  Amos,  Hosea, 
Isaiah,  and  Micah.  Of  these  the  first  three  are 
among  the  greatest  of  the  prophets.  Each  repre- 
sents an  important  aspect  of  God's  revelation  of 
himself.  Micah,  on  the  other  hand,  furnishes  an 
instructive  supplement  to  their  teaching,  but  does 
not  equal  any  one  of  them  in  importance.  Still 
it  is  in  his  book  that  we  have  one  of  the  greatest 
sayings  of  the  Old  Testament — a  saying  that 
sums  up  the  teaching  of  his  three  contemporaries 
— "What  doth  the  Lord  require  of  thee,  but  to 
do  justly,  and  to  love  mercy,  and  to  walk  humbly 
with  thy  God?"  (6.  8.)  The  second  group  of 
prophets  includes  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  Zephaniah, 
Nahum,  and  Habakkuk.  These  men  witnessed 
26 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

the  decline  and  fall  of  Assyria  and  the  rise  of 
the  new  Babylonian  empire.  They  also  stood  on 
the  brink  of  the  dissolution  of  their  own  national 
life.  It  was  natural,  therefore,  that  the  two 
greatest  of  them,  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel,  should 
lay  stress  upon  those  aspects  of  their  religion 
which  would  persist  after  the  fall  of  the  nation, 
namely,  personal  piety  and  individual  responsi- 
bility. The  other  three  represent  interesting 
side-currents  in  the  life  and  thought  of  the  people 
— Zephaniah  the  apocalyptic  tendency,  Nahum 
the  anti foreign  feeling,  and  Habakkuk  the  begin- 
ning of  speculation  in  Israel ;  but  none  of  them  is 
of  special  significance.  To  the  third  group  belong 
Deutero-Isaiah  (Isa.  40  to  66),  Haggai,  Zecha- 
riah,  Malachi,  Obadiah,  Joel,  and  Jonah.  Daniel 
is  a  late  apocalypse  (B.  C.  165),  and  is  not 
classed  with  the  prophets  in  the  Hebrew  Bible. 
Of  this  group  Deutero-Isaiah  is  by  far  the  most 
important.  In  him  the  universal  destination  of 
Israel's  religion  received  its  clearest  expression, 
and  with  him  the  mission  proper  of  prophecy 
ceased.  Haggai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi  might 
still  deal  in  a  true  prophetic  spirit  with  the  needs 
of  the  restored  community;  the  author  of  Jonah 
might  in  a  heart-moving  narrative  rebuke  Israel 
for  her  reluctance  in  carrying  out  her  divinely 
appointed  mission  to  the  world ;  and  in  Obadiah 
and  Joel  the  old  antiforeign  feeling  of  the  Jews 

27 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

and  their  faith  in  a  great  day  of  Jehovah  might 
again  receive  expression.  But  nothing  especially 
significant  was  thus  added  to  the  legacy  which 
Deutero-Isaiah  and  those  who  preceded  him  had 
left  to  subsequent  generations.  And,  finally,  the 
voice  of  the  true  prophet  ceased  to  be  heard  in 
Israel  (Psa.  74.  9). 

This  completes  our  survey  of  the  history  of 
prophecy.  We  now  pass  to  the  discussion  of  its 
nature. 

Nature  of  Prophecy 

Etymology  has  frequently  been  appealed  to  to 
determine  the  nature  of  prophecy,  but  it  has  not 
thrown  much  light  upon  the  subject.  The  origi- 
nal meaning  of  the  root  from  which  the  Hebrew 
word  for  "prophet"  was  derived  is  uncertain.  A 
common  theory  is  that  it  meant  to  "bubble"  or 
"gush,"  the  reference  being  to  the  excited  or 
frenzied  manner  of  speech  of  the  early  prophet. 
A  parallel  to  this,  it  is  claimed,  is  found  in  the 
Hebrew  word  hittiph,  which  is  sometimes  trans- 
lated "prophesy,"  but  primarily  meant  "to  let 
drop."  What  the  early  prophets,  we  are  told, 
let  drop,  was  "slaver,  as  is  usual  with  epileptics 
and  madmen."  But  this  derivation  of  the  word 
nabi  is  in  itself  highly  dubious,  and  in  any  case 
gives  us  no  insight  into  the  character  of  the  later 
prophets.  More  significant  and  more  probable 
28 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

is  the  view  which  connects  the  word  with  the 
Assyrian  verb  nabu,  meaning  "to  call,"  or 
"name,"  and  so  "announce."  The  nabu,  or 
prophet,  was  then,  the  "announcer,"  or  "herald," 
of  the  divine  will.  This  derivation  is  confirmed 
to  some  extent  by  the  Arabic,  and  furthermore 
expresses  an  essential  characteristic  of  the 
prophet  as  he  is  known  to  us  in  history. 

There  are  a  number  of  other  terms  used  in  the 
Old  Testament  to  designate  a  prophet.  He  is 
called  a  "man  of  God"  (i  Sam.  9.  6;  i  Kings 
17.  18),  a  "servant"  of  God,  or  Jehovah  (1 
Chron.  6.  49;  1  Kings  18.  36;  Isa.  20.  3),  a 
"messenger"  of  Jehovah  (Isa.  42.  19),  an  "in- 
terpreter" (Isa.  43.  27),  a  "seer"  (1  Sam.  9.  9), 
and  a  "watchman"  (Ezek.  3.  17).  These  differ- 
ent terms  all  imply  a  close  relation  of  the  prophet 
to  the  Deity,  each  term  expressing  some  aspect 
of  that  relationship,  or  of  the  prophet's  mission, 
or  of  the  way  he  attained  to  his  religious  insight. 
But  the  central  idea  contained  in  them  all  taken 
together  is  the  same  as  that  which  we  have  just 
seen  probably  underlay  the  word  nabi:  the 
prophet  was  a  mediator  by  speech  between  man 
and  God. 

It  is  worth  noting  in  this  connection  that  none 
of  these  terms  expresses  distinctly  the  idea  of 
prediction. 

This  was  also  true  of  the  English  word 
29 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

"prophet"  several  centuries  ago.  In  the  time  of 
Elizabeth  the  regular  church  services  were  spoken 
of  as  "prophesyings."  And  in  the  seventeenth 
century  Jeremy  Taylor  wrote  a  work  entitled 
"The  Liberty  of  Prophesying,"  by  which  he 
meant  the  liberty  of  preaching.  The  prefix  "pro" 
in  the  word  "prophet"  does  not  mean  "before- 
hand," as  in  such  words  as  "progress"  and  "pro- 
cession," but  "instead  of,"  as  in  the  word  "pro- 
noun." The  prophet,  then,  was  not  primarily 
one  who  foretold  events,  but  one  who  spoke  in 
God's  stead.  This  view  of  the  prophet  is  very 
clearly  expressed  in  Exod.  7.  1,  where  Jehovah 
declares  to  Moses  that  he  is  to  be  as  God  to 
Pharaoh  and  that  Aaron  his  brother  is  to  be  his 
prophet,  that  is,  his  spokesman  (compare  Exod. 
4.  16).  The  idea  of  prediction,  therefore,  was 
manifestly  a  subordinate  one  in  the  Hebrew  con- 
ception of  prophecy.  According  to  the  Old 
Testament,  the  prophet  was  primarily  and  essen- 
tially a  speaker  for  God.  It  was  his  function  to 
declare  to  men  the  divine  will  and  purpose. 
"Surely,"  says  Amos  (3.  7),  "the  Lord  Jehovah 
will  do  nothing,  except  he  reveal  his  secret  unto 
his  servants  the  prophets."  This  secret,  it  is 
true,  referred  not  infrequently  to  the  future.  But 
it  was  not  the  future  as  an  unrelated  event  or 
group  of  events  that  was  revealed  to  the  prophets. 
It  was  the  future  as  the  expression  and  outcome 

30 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

of  the  divine  will  and  character.  So  that  when 
future  events  were  foretold  by  the  prophets  the 
significant  thing  in  the  prediction  was  not  the 
mere  unveiling  of  the  future,  but  the  moral 
quality  of  the  prediction. 

We  come  here  upon  the  fundamental  differ- 
ence between  the  Hebrew  prophet  and  the  heathen 
diviner.  But  before  we  dwell  further  upon  this 
point  it  will  be  instructive  to  consider  the  rela- 
tion of  these  two  personages  to  each  other.  There 
is,  as  we  have  seen,  a  common  theory  that  proph- 
ecy was  imported  into  Israel  from  without,  that 
it  was  borrowed  from  the  Canaanites.  This 
theory  we  have  rejected.  But  at  the  same  time 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  there  was  a  consider- 
able resemblance  between  the  Israelitic  prophets 
and  those  of  other  nations.  This  resemblance  is 
implied  in  their  common  name.  It  is  also  im- 
plied in  the  fact  that  the  heathen  soothsayer 
Balaam  is  represented  as  a  truly  inspired  prophet 
of  Jehovah. 

But  heathen  divination  is  a  complex  phenome- 
non, and  must  be  analyzed  before  a  true  com- 
parison between  it  and  Hebrew  prophecy  can  be 
made.  It  has  been  customary  since  ancient  times 
to  distinguish  between  artificial,  or  mediate,  divi- 
nation on  the  one  hand  and  natural,  or  immediate, 
on  the  other.  By  "artificial,"  or  "mediate,"  divi- 
nation is  meant  the  effort  to  ascertain  the  divine 

31 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

will  by  means  of  external  signs  and  omens. 
Liver  inspection  was  especially  common  in  Baby- 
lonia, but  there,  as  elsewhere,  many  other 
methods  were  also  employed,  such  as  cup-divina- 
tion, observation  of  the  heavens,  and  the  casting 
of  lots.  Furthermore,  all  events  and  phenomena 
that  departed  in  the  least  degree  from  the  ordi- 
nary course  of  things  were  supposed  to  have 
some  mysterious  significance,  and  in  accordance 
with  this  supposition  were  interpreted  by  the 
diviners.  It  was  this  type  of  divination  that  was 
most  common  in  the  heathen  world.  Traces  of 
it  are  also  to  be  found  in  the  Old  Testament.  We 
have  there  the  casting  of  lots,  and  in  the  case  of 
Joseph  an  instance  of  cup-divination  (Gen.  44. 
5).  But  the  prophets  themselves  have  nothing 
to  do  with  "artificial"  divination.  They  utterly 
spurn  it. 

By  "natural,"  or  "immediate,"  divination  is 
meant  the  determination  of  the  divine  will  or 
attainment  of  superhuman  knowledge  by  means 
of  dreams,  visions,  and  the  utterances  of  persons 
in  a  state  of  ecstasy.  In  these  instances  God  is 
supposed  to  speak  directly  to  the  minds  of  men 
instead  of  through  outward  signs.  Dreams  are 
even  yet  mysterious  in  their  origin ;  consequently, 
it  is  not  strange  that  they  should  in  ancient  times 
have  been  looked  upon  as  divine  indications  of 
good  or  evil  fortune.     Such  significance  was  gen- 

32 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

erally  attributed  to  them  by  heathen  peoples ;  and 
traces  of  the  same  view  appear  also  in  the  Old 
Testament  in  the  cases  of  Jacob,  Joseph,  Samuel, 
Solomon,  and  Daniel.  Indeed,  dreams  seem  to 
have  been  one  of  the  most  commonly  accepted 
methods  by  means  of  which  God  was  supposed 
to  reveal  himself  in  Israel  (Num.  12.  6;  Job  33. 
I4ff. ;  Joel  2.  28).  But  however  common  this 
view  may  have  been  among  the  rank  and  file 
of  the  prophets,  the  literary  prophets  themselves 
stood  above  it.  Of  none  of  them  is  it  recorded 
that  he  received  his  message  in  a  dream.  On  the 
contrary,  Jeremiah  disparages  altogether  the  use 
of  dreams  as  a  means  of  revelation,  and  estab- 
lishes a  distinct  contrast  between  the  dreaming 
of  dreams  and  the  reception  of  the  true  word  of 
Jehovah  (23.  28). 

Visions  and  states  of  ecstasy,  on  the  other 
hand,  were  not  unknown  in  the  experiences  of 
even  the  greatest  of  the  prophets.  Originally  it 
would  seem  that  seers  and  ecstatics  were  clearly 
differentiated  from  each  other.  The  seers  were 
men  who  had  the  gift  of  clairvoyance.  Through 
vision  and  audition  the  Deity  manifested  himself 
to  them  and  revealed  to  them  things  hidden  from 
the  sense-bound  minds  of  men.  Such  persons  as 
these  figured  in  the  ancient  religions  generally, 
but  they  were  not  at  all  so  common  as  the  inter- 
preters of  dreams,  astrologers,  and  others  who 

33 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

sought  by  signs  and  omens  to  unveil  the  future 
or  secure  superhuman  guidance.  To  this  class 
belonged  Balaam,  who  is  described  as  one  "who 
heareth  the  words  of  God,  who'  seeth  the  vision 
of  the  Almighty,  falling  down  and  having  his 
eyes  open"  (Num.  24.  4).  Samuel  also  was  a 
seer;  indeed,  the  only  Israelitic  seer  of  whom  we 
have  any  detailed  account  in  the  historical  books. 
Of  him  it  was  currently  reported  that  he  was  a 
man  held  in  honor,  and  that  everything  that  he 
said  came  surely  to  pass  (1  Sam.  9.  6). 

The  ecstatics,  as  distinguished  from  the  seers, 
were  men  who  allowed  themselves  by  music  or 
otherwise  to  be  worked  up  into  an  intense  state 
of  excitement,  from  the  effects  of  which  they 
lost  either  their  normal  self-control  or  self-con- 
sciousness. In  this  condition  of  holy  frenzy  it 
was  supposed  that  they  were  possessed  of  the 
Spirit  of  God.  Hence,  whatever  they  uttered  in 
such  a  state  was  thought  to  have  oracular  signi- 
ficance. Phenomena  of  this  kind  have  appeared 
throughout  the  whole  history  of  religion.  They 
were  present,  as  we  have  seen,  in  ancient  Phoe- 
nicia and  in  early  Israel.  So  prominent  a  feature, 
indeed,  did  they  form  in  the  life  of  the  early 
prophetic  bands  that  for  centuries  afterward  the 
idea  of  madness  continued  to  be  linked  with  that 
of  prophecy  (2  Kings  9.  11 ;  Hos.  9.  7;  Jer.  29. 
26). 

34 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

But  while  the  seer  and  ecstatic  seem  thus  to 
have  been  originally  distinct,  they  must  have  both 
had  the  same  high-strung  nervous  organization, 
with  a  strong  leaning  toward  the  mystical  and 
religious.  When  they  came  together  it  was  natu- 
ral that  they  should  mutually  influence  each  other 
and  that  the  qualities  of  the  one  should  tend 
gradually  to  coalesce  with  those  of  the  other. 
This,  at  any  rate,  is  what  seems  to  have  taken 
place  in  Israel,  the  result  being  the  production  of 
a  new  type  of  prophet,  one  to  whom  no  complete 
analogue  is  to  be  found  among  other  peoples. 
The  seer  felt  the  contagion  of  the  ecstatic's  in- 
tensity and  passion.  He  ceased  to  wait  for  others 
to  call  upon  him.  He  devoted  himself  no  longer 
merely  to  such  individual  items  of  interest  as 
were  brought  to  his  attention.  His  activity  be- 
came continuous  and  aggressive.  He  threw  him- 
self into  the  midst  of  the  life  of  the  people,  seek- 
ing with  all  the  power  at  his  command  to  stir 
them  up  to  meet  whatever  emergency  confronted 
them.  The  ecstatic  on  the  other  hand  surren- 
dered himself  to  the  direction  and  restraint  of  the 
seer,  subjecting  himself  to  such  discipline  as  the 
finer  spiritual  sense  of  the  seer  dictated.  Passion 
and  insight  thus  combined  to  produce  the  later 
Hebrew  prophet.  The  wild  frenzy  of  the  ecstatic 
vanished.  The  visions  of  the  seer  continued,  it 
is  true,  but  gradually  lost  their  significance.  They 

35 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

ceased  to  be  a  test  of  inspiration.  Indeed,  in 
Num.  12.  6-8  it  is  clearly  implied  that  visions  and 
dreams  are  an  imperfect  medium  of  revelation. 
The  highest  type  is  that  represented  by  Moses, 
to  whom  God  spake  mouth  to  mouth.  Audition, 
rightly  understood,  seems  to  be  involved  in  the 
very  idea  of  prophecy  and  so  remained  a  perma- 
nent characteristic  of  the  Hebrew  prophets.  But 
more  and  more  stress  came  to  be  placed  on  the 
content  of  the  prophetic  message.  Not  how 
God  spake  to  the  prophets  but  what  he  said  to 
them  came  to  be  regarded  as  the  essential  thing. 
A  fine  illustration  of  this  is  furnished  by  Deut. 
13.  1-3,  where  it  is  declared  that  the  message  of 
a  prophet  or  a  dreamer  of  dreams,  even  if  at- 
tested by  a  sign  or  miracle,  is  not  to  be  accepted 
if  at  variance  with  one's  fundamental  religious 
convictions.  The  final  test  then  of  the  truth  of 
a  prophetic  utterance  is  to  be  found  in  the  appeal 
which  it  makes  to  our  religious  nature. 

It  is  here  that  the  vital  difference  between  the 
Hebrew  prophet  and  the  heathen  diviner  is  to  be 
found.  There  is,  as  we  have  seen,  at  some 
points  a  certain  resemblance  between  them.  The 
Israelitic  prophets  belonged  to  the  same  general 
class  of  persons  as  the  heathen  seers  and  ecstatics. 
They  had  a  gift  akin  to  that  of  clairvoyance. 
Only  on  this  assumption  can  their  consciousness 
as  revealed  in  their  written  prophecies  be  under- 

36 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

stood.  But  this  was  only  an  incidental  feature 
of  their  work.  The  validity  of  their  teaching 
was  quite  independent  of  it.  And  when  we  come 
to  the  content  of  their  oracles  as  compared  with 
the  oracles  of  their  heathen  analogues,  we  find  at 
once  a  world-wide  difference.  The  heathen 
oracles  that  have  come  down  to  us  are  miscella- 
neous in  character,  dealing  chiefly  with  subjects 
of  a  secular  and  practical  nature.  Wars,  jour- 
neys, sicknesses,  marriages,  business  enterprises, 
erection  of  houses — such  are  the  topics  dealt 
with.  There  is  no  underlying  unity  of  thought,  no 
constructive  religious  teaching.  Hebrew  proph- 
ecy, on  the  other  hand,  is  based  on  definite  princi- 
ples. It  is  a  rational  institution.  Its  teaching 
is  self-consistent,  coherent,  and  constructive.  It 
presents  to  the  world,  in  spite  of  all  differences 
in  detail,  a  unitary  conception  of  things,  the  first 
philosophy  or,  if  the  expression  be  allowed, 
theology  of  history — a  theology,  furthermore, 
which  in  its  main  outlines  is  still  the  faith  of  the 
leading  races  of  the  world. 

A  few  years  ago  something  of  a  sensation 
was  created  by  Edward  Meyer,  of  Berlin,  who 
claimed  to  have  discovered  in  certain  Egyptian 
papyri  evidence  that  an  eschatological  scheme, 
in  all  its  essential  features  the  same  as  that  of 
the  Hebrew  prophets,  was  current  in  Egypt  as 
early  as  B.   C.  2000:  "first  a  period  of  severe 

37 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

affliction,  the  destruction  of  the  government,  the 
desolation  of  the  land  and  its  sanctuaries;  then 
the  glory  of  a  Messianic  kingdom  under  a 
righteous  and  God-beloved  king  of  the  ancient 
legitimate  dynasty,  to  whom  all  peoples  are  sub- 
ject." But  subsequent  investigation  has  shown 
that  Meyer's  interpretation  of  his  Egyptian  texts 
was  hasty,  that  they  say  nothing  about  a  Mes- 
siah, and  that  they  simply  describe  a  national 
catastrophe  which  is  to  be  followed  by  a  period 
of  blessing  and  prosperity.  Of  such  an  idea  as 
that  of  a  plan  of  God,  or  that  of  his  moral  gov- 
ernment of  the  world,  or  that  of  the  coming 
of  his  kingdom,  they  do  not  furnish  the  slightest 
trace.  These  ideas  are  the  unique  product  of 
Hebrew  prophecy.  Heathen  divination  nowhere 
provides  a  parallel  to  them. 

Still  Bernhard  Stade  has  defined  prophecy  as 
a  "branch  of  manticism."  If  this  be  correct,  we 
have  here  a  case  where  the  branch  is  far  more 
important  than  the  tree,  and  bears  a  very  differ- 
ent kind  of  fruit.  The  fact  is  that  it  is  only  in 
a  superficial  way  that  prophecy  is  connected  with 
manticism,  or  divination.  We  can  trace  the  his- 
tory of  prophecy  back  to  its  roots  in  divination. 
But  this  certainly  does  not  make  the  two  identi- 
cal. Institutions  are  to  be  judged  not  by  their 
roots  but  by  their  fruits.  And  so  judged, 
prophecy    must    be   declared    to    have    only    the 

38 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

remotest  relation  to  divination.  The  two  stand 
at  almost  opposite  poles.  Such  also  is  the  judg- 
ment of  Scripture.  Isaiah  (2.  6;  8.  19)  con- 
demns the  practice  of  divination  in  Israel  as  one 
of  the  grounds  for  her  rejection  by  Jehovah,  and 
Deut.  18.  9-18  denounces  every  kind  of  diviner 
as  an  abomination  untO'  Jehovah,  declaring  that 
in  Israel  the  place  of  the  diviner  is  to  be  taken 
by  that  of  the  prophet. 

In  view  of  this  wide  disparity  between 
prophecy  and  divination,  and  especially  in  view 
of  the  superstitious  or  pathological  character 
of  the  latter,  it  may  at  first  seem  strange  that 
prophecy  should  ever  have  had  any  connection 
with  it  whatsoever.  We  are,  it  is  true,  familiar 
with  the  idea  that  chemistry  had  its  origin  in 
alchemy  and  astronomy  in  astrology.  But  the 
relation  of  the  prophet  to  the  diviner  is  more 
intimate  than  this.  It  is  not  merely  historical. 
There  is  between  the  two  a  certain  mental  resem- 
blance. A  gift  akin  to  that  of  clairvoyance  was 
possessed  by  even  the  greatest  of  the  prophets. 
To  be  sure,  the  cruder  features  of  the  heathen 
clairvoyant  do  not  appear  in  the  Israelitic 
prophet.  The  literary  prophets,  for  instance, 
were  not  dependent  for  their  messages  upon 
visions.  They  "always  retained  a  clear  conscious- 
ness and  distinct  recollection  of  what  they  saw 
in  spirit  and  what  was  said  to  them,"  and  "they 

39 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

never  appeared  before  their  auditors  in  a  state 
of  ecstasy."  Plato's  idea,  that  "inspired  and  true 
divination  is  not  attained  by  anyone  in  his  full 
senses,  but  only  when  the  power  of  thought  is 
fettered  by  sleep  or  disease  or  some  paroxysm 
of  frenzy,"  does  not  apply  to  them.  They 
received  their  messages,  at  least  for  the  most 
part,  and  did  their  work  when  in  the  full  posses- 
sion of  their  normal  faculties.  But  after  allow- 
ance has  been  made  for  all  these  differences,  it 
is  still  true  that  something  of  the  quality  of  the 
heathen  seer  clings  to  the  Hebrew  prophet.  He 
had  the  power  of  presentiment,  the  faculty  of 
peering  into  the  future.  He  was  to  a  certain 
extent  what  is  to-day  called  a  psychopath. 

This  fact  has  not  been  altogether  acceptable 
to  the  modern  mind.  Hence,  some  have  sought 
to  explain  it  away.  They  have  accounted  for  the 
predictions  of  the  prophets  by  ascribing  them  to 
an  extraordinarily  fine  moral  sense,  which  led  the 
prophets  to  conclude  that  the  sins  of  their  own 
day  must  be  punished  by  some  great  national 
calamity.  But  this  theory  does  not  fit  in  well 
with  the  language  of  the  prophets.  "Thus  saith 
the  Lord"  and  other  expressions  that  imply 
direct  communications  from  the  Deity  can  hardly 
be  regarded  as  purely  figurative.  Then,  too,  it 
fails  to  account  for  the  periods  of  silence  during 
which  no  significant  prophet  appeared.  These 
40 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

periods,  such  as  that  during  the  reign  of  Manas- 
seh,  called  for  the  voice  of  judgment  quite  as 
much  as  other  periods.  It  would  seem,  then, 
that  something  else  besides  the  fine  moral  sense 
of  the  prophets  must  have  been  responsible  for 
their  public  appearance.  In  this  connection  we 
may  remind  ourselves  that  the  first  group  of 
literary  prophets — Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah,  and 
Micah — all  appeared  shortly  before  the  fall  of 
Samaria  in  B.  C.  721 ;  and  that  the  second  group 
of  literary  prophets — Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  Zepha- 
niah,  Nahum,  and  Habakkuk — all  appeared 
shortly  before  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  in  B.  C.  586. 
This  suggests  that  it  was  their  presentiment  of 
an  approaching  danger,  and  not  simply  their 
moral  judgment,  that  led  to  their  messages  of 
doom.  And  this  conclusion  is  strongly  favored 
by  the  prophetic  oracles  themselves.  The 
prophets  had  premonitions  of  impending  events. 
These  premonitions  they  ascribed  to  the  word 
of  God.  Exactly  what  their  psychological  state 
was  when  Jehovah,  as  they  said,  spake  to  them, 
we  do  not  know.  Stade  has  suggested  that  we 
have  here  a  case  of  split-personality,  "the  second 
I  of  the  prophet  taking  the  form  of  an  object 
of  religious  faith."  But  this  theory  hardly  solves 
the  mystery  of  the  prophetic  consciousness, 
though  it  may  indicate  the  form  under  which  the 
divine   word    presented    itself    to    the    prophet's 

41 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

mind.  Anyhow,  it  is  certain  that  the  prophets 
had  intuitions  and  premonitions  which  they  dis- 
tinguished from  their  own  thoughts  and  ascribed 
to  God  (Jer.  42.  7). 

The  clairvoyant  quality  of  the  prophetic  mind 
has  no  special  interest  for  us  to-day.  What  we 
look  to  the  prophets  for  is  moral  instruction  and 
inspiration.  That  they  had  a  peculiar  psycho- 
logical endowment  which  enabled  them  to  hear 
voices  and  to  peer  into  the  future  does  not  espe- 
cially concern  us.  Perhaps  it  would  be  some- 
thing of  a  relief  to  us  if  it  should  be  proven  that 
they  were  not  so  endowed.  In  any  case,  we  are 
disposed  to  look  upon  this  feature  of  their  life 
and  work  as  wholly  incidental,  if  not  accidental. 
God  might,  we  think,  have  taken  men  without 
any  such  quality  of  mind,  and  so  filled  them  with 
his  spirit  of  righteousness  and  wisdom  that  they 
would  have  spoken  with  as  much  conviction  and 
sense  of  authority  as  did  our  canonical  prophets. 
But  whatever  may  have  been  theoretically  possi- 
ble, it  is  still  true  that  God  chose  men  of  the 
other  type  as  the  chief  organs  of  his  self-revela- 
tion. Why  he  did  so  is  a  mystery  of  divine 
Providence,  and  perhaps  will  always  remain  such. 
One  or  two  possible  reasons,  however,  for  the 
fact  may  be  suggested.  In  the  first  place,  men  in 
that  day  were  accustomed  to  look  upon  the  mar- 
velous and  extraordinary  as  the  one  way  in 
42 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

which  God  manifested  himself  to  men.  Mental 
states  of  an  abnormal  or  supernormal  character 
were  supposed  to  be  especially  clear  indications 
of  the  Spirit's  presence.  Accordingly,  it  is  not 
improbable  that  some  unusual  psychological 
experience  was  necessary  at  that  time  to  create 
the  conviction  that  a  message  had  been  received 
from  God.  The  moral  and  spiritual  nature  was 
not  yet  sufficiently  independent,  was  not  yet  sure 
enough  of  itself,  to  stand  forth  as  the  self-con- 
scious voice  of  God  himself.  The  choice  of  seers 
and  ecstatics  as  the  mediums  of  divine  revela- 
tion may  therefore  be  regarded  as  an  accommo- 
dation on  the  part  of  God  to  the  imperfect 
spiritual  development  of  the  time.  Moreover, 
the  undoubted  influence  which  the  fulfillment  of 
the  prophets'  predictions  had  upon  the  ultimate 
acceptance  of  their  spiritual  messages  makes  it 
impossible  for  us  to  escape  the  conviction  that 
these  predictions,  however  subordinate  they  may 
be  from  our  modern  point  of  view,  still  had  their 
place  in  the  true  word  of  God. 

In  the  next  place,  this  peculiar  mental  endow- 
ment was  not  characteristic  of  the  prophets  only. 
Many  other  great  religious  teachers  have  had  it 
— Paul,  for  instance.  This  fact  suggests  that 
the  capacity  for  visions  and  auditions  may  have 
had  some  close  connection  with  the  development 
of  religion.     It  may  have  served  the  purpose  of 

43 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

disengaging  the  moral  and  spiritual  nature  of 
men  from  its  sense-bound  environment,  and  so 
of  enabling  it  to  come  to  its  full  and  independent 
expression.  For  in  its  last  analysis  what  we 
have  in  prophecy  is  simply  the  moral  deeps  of 
human  nature  breaking  forth  into  the  stream  of 
human  life  and  thought.  Up  to  this  time  the 
moral  nature  of  men  had  been  limited,  hampered 
in  its  development.  It  needed  the  help  of  seers 
and  visionaries  in  order  to  come  to  itself  and  to 
assert  itself  against  the  competing  interests  of 
life.  The  supernormal  gifts,  then,  of  the  prophets 
served  an  important  purpose.  They  helped,  so 
to  speak,  to  put  the  moral  and  spiritual  nature 
of  men  upon  its  feet,  helped  it  to  take  its  rightful 
place  in  human  life  as  the  one  absolutely  authori- 
tative element  in  it. 

One  of  the  most  remarkable  things  about  the 
prophets  is  that  they  themselves  recognized  fully 
this  subsidiary  character  of  their  extraordinary 
experiences.  By  means  of  them  they  knew  they 
had  received  an  insight  into  things  divine  which 
the  common  run  of  men  did  not  possess.  They 
had  entered  into  the  "counsel"  of  God,  the 
"secret"  of  God,  the  "plan"  of  God,  the  "ways" 
of  God,  the  "thoughts"  of  God.  A  great  variety 
of  terms  were  used  to  express  the  content  of  the 
revelation  made  to  them.  Still  they  laid  no  stress 
upon  these  experiences  as  such.  However  "hid- 
44 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

den"  from  men  in  general  the  revelation  might 
be,  it  was  not  esoteric  in  character.  It  did  not 
require  such  supernormal  experiences  as  they 
themselves  had  had  in  order  to  be  appreciated. 
These  experiences  were  special  and  of  no  abiding 
significance.  The  revelation  itself,  on  the  other 
hand,  was  adapted  to  all  men;  and  it  was  so 
adapted  because  it  was  a  true  and  lofty  expres- 
sion of  the  common  ethical  and  spiritual  nature 
of  man.  Tertullian  once  said  that  "the  human 
heart  is  naturally  Christian."  By  this  he  meant 
that  the  Christian  life  is  simply  human  nature 
at  its  best.  And  so  it  is  with  the  teaching  of  the 
prophets.  They  introduced  no  "mysteries"  into 
human  life,  nothing  abnormal  or  supernormal. 
They  simply  took  the  profoundest  elements  in 
human  nature,  by  divinely  granted  insight 
deduced  their  implications,  and  then  gave  to 
them  a  brilliant  and  abiding  expression.  In  a 
word,  they  did  for  the  moral  and  spiritual  nature 
of  man  what  the  Greek  philosophers  did  for  the 
human  intellect. 

The  mention  of  the  Greek  philosophers  sug- 
gests that  they  rather  than  the  heathen  diviners 
furnish  the  most  instructive  analogue  to  the 
Hebrew  prophets.  In  its  roots,  prophecy  is 
linked  to  divination,  but  in  its  fruits  it  bears  a 
considerable  resemblance  to  philosophy.     These 

45 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

two  movements — Hebrew  prophecy  and  Greek 
philosophy — have  been  the  great  creative  forces 
in  the  spiritual  and  intellectual  history  of  man- 
kind. In  method  the  two  movements  differ 
radically.  "The  philosopher,"  as  some  one  has 
put  it,  "moves  toward  God  through  the  world 
and  man;  the  prophet  comes  from  God  to  the 
world  and  man.  The  one  is  in  search  for  God ; 
the  other  is  found  of  God ;  the  one  longs  for 
certitude,  the  other  has  it."  But  this  difference 
of  method  does  not  necessarily  indicate  a  radical 
difference  of  source.  It  does  not  necessarily 
imply  that  the  one  movement  was  purely  human 
and  the  other  absolutely  divine.  Between  the 
human  and  the  divine  there  is  no  fixed  line  of 
demarcation.  The  two  interpenetrate  each  other, 
and  there  is  no  way  of  completely  separating 
them.  Prophecy  carries  with  it  the  idea  of  in- 
spiration and  revelation,  not  because  there  is  no 
human  element  in  it,  but  because  it  is  the  out- 
growth of  those  loftiest  elements  of  human 
nature  which  we  instinctively  and  immediately 
associate  with  the  idea  of  the  Spirit  of  God. 
Philosophy,  on  the  other  hand,  makes  no  claim 
to  supernatural  inspiration,  not  because  there 
are  no  sparks  of  the  divine  in  it,  but  because  it 
is,  for  the  most  part,  the  outcome  of  that  side 
of  our  nature  which  seems  less  closely  linked 
with  God.     In  prophecy  it  is  preeminently  the 

46 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

heart  and  conscience  that  speak  to  us,  in 
philosophy  the  intellect.  The  difference,  then, 
between  the  method  of  the  prophet  and  that  of 
the  philosopher  finds  its  justification  in  the  com- 
mon conviction  that  the  heart  and  conscience 
stand  nearer  to  God  than  the  intellect.  God. 
therefore,  it  is  believed,  could  speak  more 
directly  and  distinctly  through  the  intuitions  of 
the  Hebrew  than  the  reason  of  the  Greek.  That 
this  belief  is  correct  cannot  be  demonstrated,  but 
it  is,  nevertheless,  an  assumption  that  our  nature, 
made  as  it  is,  can  hardly  escape.  Were  we  pure 
intellects,  "wholly  brain,"  we  would  perhaps 
agree  with  Renan  that  "the  greatest  miracle  on 
record  is  Greece."  But  constituted  as  we  are, 
with  unutterable  yearnings  after  God,  with  souls 
that  reach  out  irresistibly  after  love  and  right- 
eousness, it  is  impossible  that  we  should  not  see 
in  the  prophets  of  Israel  and  in  Him  who  came 
to  fulfill  their  work  the  supreme  word  of  God. 

In  spite,  however,  of  this  difference  of  method 
and  character,  Greek  philosophy  in  its  final  out- 
come arrived  at  a  view  of  the  world  essentially 
similar  to  that  of  the  Hebrew  prophets.  This 
is  a  remarkable  and  significant  fact,  that  the  only 
philosophic  movement  in  the  world  which  has 
run  its  full  course  ended  in  a  spiritual  view  of 
the  universe.  We  have  in  this  fact  a  striking 
testimony   alike   to  the   unity   and  the   essential 

47 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

religiousness  of  human  nature.  Not  only  heart 
and  conscience,  but  intellect  as  well,  when  it 
understands  itself,  turns  inevitably  toward  God. 
There  is,  however,  still  a  vital  difference  between 
the  work  of  the  prophet  and  that  of  the  philoso- 
pher. The  latter  was  never  able  to  lay  hold  of 
the  popular  mind  in  the  way  that  the  prophet 
did.  Some  of  the  greatest  of  the  Greek  philoso- 
phers, for  instance,  protested  against  idolatry 
and  denounced  the  use  of  images,  but  they 
made  no  impression  on  the  popular  religion.  And 
so  with  the  religious  life  as  a  whole;  in  spite 
of  themselves  the  philosophers  stood  apart  from 
it.  They  did  not  understand  the  secret  of  its 
power,  and  hence  could  do  little  to  transform 
and  elevate  it.  The  prophets,  on  the  other  hand, 
were  men  of  the  people.  No  pride  of  intellect 
separated  them  from  the  mass  of  their  country- 
men. They  knew  what  religion  was ;  they  knew 
what  it  meant  to  the  average  man;  they  had 
themselves  experienced  its  power;  above  all  else 
they  were  themselves  men  of  the  Spirit.  Hence 
it  was  possible  for  them  to  lay  firm  hold  of  the 
popular  religion,  shake  out  of  it  its  heathenism, 
and  still  preserve  it  strong  and  vital.  The 
trouble  with  all  purely  philosophic  attempts  to 
remedy  the  shortcomings  of  religion  is  that  the 
cure,  if  insisted  on,  always  kills  the  patient.  A 
purely  rationalistic  religion  is  no  religion  at  all. 
48 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

The  great  achievement  of  the  prophets  lies  in  the 
fact  that,  while  purifying  and  spiritualizing  reli- 
gion to  a  degree  never  before  attained,  they  still 
preserved  its  pristine  power.  This  fact,  once  for 
all,  sets  them  on  high  above  all  philosophers  and 
sages. 

But  before  we  conclude  our  study  of  the 
nature  of  prophecy  we  must  also  distinguish  the 
work  of  the  prophet  from  that  of  two  Old  Testa- 
ment characters,  the  priest  and  the  apoealyptist. 
Priests  and  prophets  formed  the  two  classes  of 
religious  leaders  in  Israel.  Occasionally  the  two 
offices  were  combined  in  the  same  person,  as 
in  the  case  of  Samuel,  but  usually  they  were  kept 
distinct.  The  priests  gradually  became  a  closed 
order,  becoming  confined  at  first  to  a  single 
tribe,  that  of  Levi,  and  later  to  a  particular 
family,  the  house  of  Aaron.  The  prophets,  on 
the  other  hand,  never  became  a  caste.  No  man 
was  a  prophet  by  birth,  but  only  by  divine  call. 
In  function,  also,  the  prophets  and  priests  differed. 
The  priests  dealt  chiefly  with  the  institutional 
side  of  religion.  Their  duties  were  sacrificial 
and  judicial  (Deut.  33.  10).  It  was  their  task 
to  apply  the  law  to  concrete  cases.  The  prophets, 
on  the  other  hand,  looked  upon  the  law  as  a 
general  rule  of  life,  and  sought  to  enforce  its 
essential  teaching.  As  Davidson  has  finely  put 
it,  "They  went  down  into  its  deeps  and  came  up 

49 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

armed  with  its  fundamental  principle,  the  very 
concentration  of  its  elements  into  one  formula, 
the  retributive  righteousness  of  God;  and  with 
this  terrible  weapon  they  sought  to  curb  and 
coerce  the  idolatrous  and  immoral  leanings  of 
their  nation,  and  hold  their  hearts  true  to  the 
allegiance  of  the  living  God.'' 

From  these  facts  it  follows  naturally  that  the 
priests  were  the  conservative  and  the  prophets 
the  progressive  force  in  the  religious  history  of 
Israel.  The  great  ideas  of  the  Old  Testament 
were  not  first  embodied  in  the  priestly  law  and 
later  expounded  and  enforced  by  the  prophets. 
The  order  was  the  reverse.  First,  the  prophets 
gave  expression  to  the  great  spiritual  principles 
of  Old  Testament  faith,  and  then  later  the 
priests  reduced  those  principles  to  symbol  and 
statute.  Or,  to  put  it  differently,  the  prophets 
first  moralized  the  popular  religion,  and  then 
later  the  priests  popularized  the  prophetic  reli- 
gion by  putting  it  in  concrete  and  symbolic  form. 
To  have  recognized  and  proven  this  fact  is  the 
greatest  single  achievement  of  modern  Old 
Testament  scholarship.  Not  until  this  was  done 
was  it  possible  to  give  to  the  prophets  their  true 
place  in  Israelitic  history  and  really  appreciate 
their  unique  character  and  epoch-making  signifi- 
cance. 

Apocalyptic  is  the  form  of  literature  into 
50 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

which  prophecy  gradually  changed  and  by  which 
it  was  eventually  succeeded.  Illustrations  of  it 
are  to  be  found  in  Ezekiel,  Zechariah,  and  some 
of  the  other  later  prophetic  writings;  and  the 
book  of  Daniel  as  a  whole  is  an  apocalypse.  The 
apocalyptist  is  commonly  supposed  to  differ  from 
the  prophet  in  four  regards.  First,  his  work  is 
pseudepigraphic.  He  hides  himself  behind  some 
distinguished  seer  of  the  past  such  as  Enoch  or 
Daniel,  into  whose  mouth  he  puts  his  own  words. 
The  prophet,  on  the  other  hand,  maintains  and 
asserts  his  own  individuality,  conscious  that  in 
all  that  he  says  he  is  impelled  by  the  Spirit  of 
God.  Secondly,  the  apocalyptist  is  a  writer 
rather  than  a  preacher.  His  messages  are  the 
product  of  the  study  rather  than  the  arena.  The 
reverse  is  the  case  with  the  prophet.  He  is 
primarily  a  preacher,  a  man  of  affairs  in  living 
contact  with  the  world  about  him,  and  only  inci- 
dentally an  author.  Thirdly,  the  apocalyptist  is 
imitative.  He  simply  takes  the  ideas  handed 
down  from  the  past  and  works  them  up  into  new 
forms.  The  prophet,  on  the  other  hand,  is  crea- 
tive. He  is  a  pioneer  in  the  kingdom  of  God, 
exploring  new  territory,  originating  new  concep- 
tions. Fourthly,  the  interests  of  the  apocalyptist 
are  primarily  eschatological.  His  eye  is  fixed 
on  the  future.  He  depicts  the  marvelous  things 
that  are  soon  to  occur,  and  having  no  real  knowl- 

5i 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

edge  of  the  world  about  him  often  represents  them 
in  a  fantastic  way.  Not  so,  however,  the  prophet. 
His  feet  are  planted  on  the  earth.  He  knows 
the  actual  forces  round  about  him,  sees  God  in 
them,  and  so  gives  us  what  may  be  termed  a 
historical  or  natural  representation  of  the  future. 
Such  is  the  common  characterization  of  the 
apocalyptist  and  prophet  in  their  relation  to  each 
other;  and  in  an  abstract  and  ideal  sense  it  may 
be  accepted  as  correct.  In  reality,  however,  there 
was  no  such  sharp  antithesis  between  the  prophet 
and  the  apocalyptist  as  is  here  implied.  In  every 
apocalyptist  there  was  more  or  less  of  the 
prophet,  and  in  every  prophet  more  or  less  of 
the  apocalyptist.  This  was  especially  true  as 
regards  eschatology,  and  true  to  a  much  larger 
extent  than  has  commonly  been  supposed.  The 
current  view  is  that  Old  Testament  eschatology 
grew  up  along  with  or  as  a  result  of  the  work  of 
the  literary  prophets.  It  was,  therefore,  almost 
exclusively  a  characteristic  of  the  later  prophets 
and  the  apocalyptists.  But  this  view  has  in 
recent  years  been  shown  to  be  incorrect.  A  group 
of  German  scholars,  among  whom  Gunkel, 
Gressmann,  and  Sellin  are  the  most  prominent, 
have  made  it  clear  that  the  eschatology  of  the 
Old  Testament,  instead  of  being  the  product  of 
literary  prophecy,  antedated  it.  Before  the  time 
of  Amos  there  was  in  Israel  a  developed  escha- 

52 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

tology.  It  was  probably  cultivated  in  the  pro- 
phetic schools,  and  was  more  or  less  widely  cur- 
rent among  the  people. 

This  discovery  is  the  most  important  recent 
contribution  to  the  correct  understanding  of  the 
literary  prophets.  It  has  given  to  them  a  new 
background,  and  has  set  their  teaching  in  quite 
a  new  light.  Not  only  is  this  true  of  individual 
passages,  here  and  there,  but  also  of  their  whole 
message.  It  is  now  clear  that  the  prophets  in 
their  conception  of  the  divine  presence  and 
operation  in  the  world  did  not  reckon  simply 
with  natural  and  historical  forces.  Nor  did  they 
address  themselves  to  a  people  completely  sunk 
in  religious  naturalism.  There  were  circles  in 
Israel  in  which  the  atmosphere  was  vibrant  with 
fear  and  hope,  groups  of  people  who  believed  in 
the  approach  of  a  great  day  of  Jehovah,  a  day 
of  universal  terror.  On  that  day  the  nations  of 
the  world  would  be  overthrown,  but  Israel,  as 
the  chosen  of  Jehovah,  would  be  rescued. 

To  people  holding  such  beliefs  it  was  that  the 
literary  prophets  came  with  their  message,  and 
to  them  they  announced  that  the  day  of  Jehovah 
was  now  at  hand,  and  that,  whatever  it  might 
mean  to  other  nations,  it  was  to  be  to  Israel,  not 
a  day  of  salvation,  but  a  day  of  doom.  This 
doom  was  to  be  brought  about  by  foreign  inva- 
sion.    But  it  was  not   to  be  simply  a  political 

53 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

catastrophe;  it  was  to  be  a  great  crisis  in  the 
history  of  the  whole  world ;  it  was  to  introduce 
a  kind  of  final  judgment,  and  so  bring  about  the 
goal  toward  which  the  universal  plan  of  God 
was  moving.  There  was  thus  an  eschatological 
element  in  it.  The  day  of  Jehovah  was  not 
simply  a  day  of  captivity  for  Israel,  a  day  of 
punishment  for  her  sins ;  it  was  the  culmination 
of  a  divine  plan  that  had  significance  for  the 
entire  world,  the  inauguration  of  a  new  era  in 
the  history  of  mankind. 

From  this  fact  it  is  clear  that  Jehovah  was 
regarded  by  the  prophets  not  only  as  the  God  of 
history  but  also  as  the  God  of  destiny.  There 
was  in  his  relation  to  Israel  a  superhistorical 
element.  He  represented  to  them  not  only  the 
iron  hand  of  historical  necessitv,  but  also  the 
transcendent  power  of  the  eternal  Judge  and 
Ruler  of  men.  Only  as  this  truth  is  grasped  are 
we  able  fully  to  appreciate  the  absoluteness  of 
the  prophet's  message  and  the  finality  with  which 
it  was  delivered.  The  prophet  never  spoke  as 
a  mere  social  reformer  nor  as  a  mere  practical 
statesman.  He  never  dealt  with  merely  historical 
forces,  for  to  the  very  core  of  his  being  he  was 
a  religious  teacher.  And  religion  by  its  very 
nature  cannot  be  confined  to  the  purely  historical. 
Instinctively  and  irresistibly,  it  breaks  through 
the  confines  of  the  temporal  and  empirical  and 
54 


THE  HISTORY  AND  NATURE  OF  PROPHECY 

lays  hold  of  the  eternal.  In  order,  then,  to  un- 
derstand the  teaching  of  the  prophets,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  bear  in  mind  the  fact  that  from  their 
point  of  view  they  were  dealing  with  eternal 
issues.  What  death  means  to  us  to-day,  the  day 
of  Jehovah  meant  to  them.  It  was  something 
final  and  eternally  significant.  It  marked,  not 
the  end  of  everything,  but  the  beginning  of  a 
new  era,  in  which  God  would  be  present  in  a 
manner  and  to  a  degree  that  he  had  not  been 
present  before. 

From  this  it  follows  that  the  prophets  were  not 
simply  preachers  of  repentance.  They  were  also 
the  heralds  of  a  new  kingdom.  It  was  their 
task  to  announce  the  coming  of  Jehovah.  No 
element  in  their  teaching  was  more  common  to 
all  of  them  than  this,  and  none  more  fundamen- 
tal. It  binds  all  their  utterances  together  into 
unity,  and  connects  them  also  with  the  fuller 
revelation  of  a  later  dav. 


55 


CHAPTER  II 
AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

Some  Old  Testament  characters  have  suffered 
severely  at  the  hands  of  modern  critics.  Abra- 
ham, for  instance,  is  declared  by  the  more  radical 
to  be  a  myth.  Moses,  they  say,  had  nothing 
whatsoever  to  do  with  the  Law  that  bears  his 
name;  indeed,  his  very  existence  has  been  denied. 
Samuel,  they  claim,  was  not  a  judge  or  prophet, 
but  simply  "the  seer  of  a  small  town,  .  .  . 
known  only  as  a  clairvoyant,  whose  information 
concerning  lost  or  strayed  property  was  reliable." 
David,  they  confidently  assert,  not  only  did  not 
write  any  of  the  Psalms,  but  was  a  man  of  very 
crude,  half-barbarous  religious  conceptions. 
Solomon,  they  hold,  instead  of  being  remarkable 
for  his  wisdom,  was  merely  a  shortsighted 
Oriental  despot.  And  so  there  are  many  others 
who  have  been  shorn  of  much,  if  not  all,  of  the 
honor  that  once  attached  to  their  names  by  the 
ruthless  knife  of  criticism. 

This,  however,  is  not  the  case  with  the  prophet 
Amos.  Much  of  the  distinction  he  now  enjoys 
is  due  to  the  work  of  the  critics.  It  is  they  who 
56 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

have  given  him  his  present  exalted  position  in 
biblical  history.  A  century  ago  he  was  simply 
one  of  the  minor  prophets.  No  special  signifi- 
cance attached  to  him.  He  was  not  regarded 
as  original  in  thought,  and  his  style  was  supposed 
to  be  that  of  a  rustic,  lacking  in  refinement.  But 
observe  what  the  pillars  of  Old  Testament 
scholarship  now  say  of  him.  ''The  book  of 
Amos,"  says  Cheyne,  "forms  a  literary  as  well 
as  a  prophetic  phenomenon."  "To  the  unpreju- 
diced judgment,"  says  W.  Robertson  Smith,  "the 
prophecy  of  Amos  appears  one  of  the  best 
examples  of  pure  Hebrew  style.  The  language, 
the  images,  the  grouping  are  alike  admirable; 
and  the  simplicity  of  the  diction  ...  is  a  token, 
not  of  rusticity,  but  of  perfect  mastery."  "There 
is  nowhere,"  says  Harper,  "to  be  found  in  the 
Old  Testament  an  example  of  a  stronger  or  purer 
literary  style."  "His  language,"  says  Driver,  "is 
pure,  his  style  classical  and  refined."  And  more 
striking  still  are  the  testimonies  to  his  importance 
as  a  religious  teacher.  Wellhausen  says  that 
he  "was  the  founder  of  the  purest  type  of  a  new 
phase  of  prophecy."  Marti  declares  that  he  is 
"one  of  the  most  prominent  landmarks  in  the 
history  of  religion."  Kuenen  speaks  of  him  and 
his  immediate  successors  as  "the  creators  of 
ethical  monotheism,"  and  Cornill  describes  him 
as  "one  of  the  most  marvelous  and  incompre- 

57 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

hensible  figures  in  the  history  of  the  human 
mind,  the  pioneer  of  a  process  of  evolution  from 
which  a  new  epoch  of  humanity  dates." 

In  this  new  estimate  of  Amos  there  is  a  large 
element  of  exaggeration.  He  was  not  so  original 
as  these  critics  claim.  His  teaching  had  its  roots 
in  the  past.  It  was  the  natural  outgrowth  of  the 
religious  thought  in  Israel  before  his  time.  It 
did  not  flash  upon  the  world  as  something  alto- 
gether novel  and  unexpected.  As  one  reads  the 
book  of  Amos  one  is  reminded  of  Emerson's 
words  to  Walt  Whitman.  "I  greet  you,"  he  said, 
"at  the  beginning  of  a  great  career,  which  yet 
must  have  had  a  long  foreground  somewhere  for 
such  a  start."  The  type  of  thought  which  Amos 
represents  cannot,  as  the  Germans  say,  have  been 
"shot  out  of  a  pistol."  It  "must  have  had  a  long 
foreground  somewhere."  It  must  have  been  pre- 
pared for  by  centuries  of  reflection  on  the  deep 
things  of  God.  The  same  is  also  to  be  said  of 
the  literary  style  of  Amos.  It  points  to  a  long- 
antecedent  literary  activity  in  Israel.  Amos  can- 
not have  created  it  outright.  He  must  have  had 
his  literary  models.  He  was  not,  then,  such  a 
prodigy  of  originality  as  some  moderns  would 
make  out. 

Nevertheless,  he  was  a  great  and  significant 
personality.  The  old  view  did  not  do  him  jus- 
tice.    It  failed  to  recognize  the  fact  that  he  was 

58 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

the  first  of  the  literary  prophets,  and  as  such 
represented  an  important  step  forward  in  the 
religious  history  of  Israel.  This  forward  step 
did  not  consist  so  much  in  the  announcement  of 
new  ideas  as  in  the  clarification  and  spiritualiza- 
tion  of  religious  thought  in  general.  But  it  was 
not  on  that  account  any  the  less  important.  The 
great  need  of  the  people  of  Israel  in  the  eighth 
century  before  Christ  was  that  the  heathen 
elements  which  had  crept  into  their  life  and 
worship  in  the  course  of  centuries  should  be 
eliminated.  And  this  need  the  literary  prophets 
set  themselves  to  meet.  They  revived  the  Mosaic 
ideal ;  they  taught  the  people  the  essential  nature 
of  true  worship ;  they  made  it  clear  that  Jehovah 
was  above  everything  else  a  God  of  righteous- 
ness, and  that  as  such  he  cared  nothing  for  the 
special  privileges  of  Israel  or  for  rites  and  cere- 
monies. What  he  alone  required  was  holy  living. 
They  thus  moralized  religion,  and  not  only  mor- 
alized it,  but  also  universalized  it ;  for  the  God  in 
whose  name  they  spoke  was  not  only  God  of 
Israel  but  of  all  the  world.  Their  work,  there- 
fore, prepared  the  way  for  Christianity  and 
for  the  world-wide  sway  of  a  religion  of  right- 
eousness and  love.  Accordingly,  it  is  no  small 
distinction  to  have  initiated  this  movement. 
Even  if  Amos  had  no  other  claims  to  our  ad- 
miration, this  fact  alone  would  entitle  him  to  be 

59 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

classed  with  the  beacon  lights  of  prophecy.  But 
he  was  not  simply  the  first  of  the  literary 
prophets.  He  was  in  and  of  himself  a  striking 
character  with  a  striking  message,  and,  as  such, 
is  abundantly  deserving  of  our  careful  study. 
Of  the  life  of  Amos  we  know  very  little,  noth- 
ing, indeed,  except  what  we  find  in  his  book. 
From  the  latter  we  learn  that  he  lived  in  the 
days  of  Jeroboam  II  (B.  C.  781-740.).  As  a 
long  period  of  prosperity  seems  to  lie  back  of 
the  prophet,  we  conclude  that  his  ministry  fell 
in  the  second  half  of  Jeroboam's  reign,  probably 
about  B.  C.  750.  We  are  also  told  that  his  home 
was  Tekoa,  a  town  twelve  miles  south  of  Jeru- 
salem. Tekoa  was  situated  on  the  top  of  a  high 
hill  twenty-seven  hundred  feet  above  the  sea,  and 
so  offered  a  commanding  view  over  the  desolate 
region  round  about.  This  environment  no  doubt 
had  its  influence  on  the  growing  mind  of  the 
prophet.  G.  A.  Smith  thinks  it  clear  from  his 
book  that  Amos  must  have  "haunted  heights, 
and  lived  in  the  face  of  wide  horizons."  Such 
a  conclusion  as  this  might  naturally  be  drawn 
from  4.  13;  5.  8,  9;  and  9.  5,  6.  But,  unfortu- 
nately, these  three  passages  are  commonly 
▼  assigned  to  a  later  hand.  And  it  hardly  relieves 
the  situation  to  be  told,  as  we  are,  by  the  same 
author,  that,  while  this  is  true,  "no  one  questions 
their  right  to  the  place  which  some  great  spirit 

60 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

gave  them  in  this  book — their  suitableness  to  its 
grand  and  ordered  theme,  their  pure  vision  and 
their  eternal  truth."  The  chief  reason  for  deny- 
ing these  passages  to  Amos  is  that  they  disturb 
the  continuity  of  thought.  But  this  is  not  true 
of  4.  13,  and  as  for  the  other  two  passages  it 
is  possible  that  they  have  been  displaced  from 
their  original  connection.  Then,  too,  it  is  to 
be  observed  that  sudden  and  unexpected  flashes 
of  thought  are  characteristic  of  Amos.  He  likes 
to  startle  his  hearers  by  some  bold  and  surprising 
turn  of  expression  that  gives  to  his  discourse  a 
new  background  (3.  2;  4.  4;  9.  7).  Therefore 
it  is  not  improbable  that  these  disputed  "nature- 
passages"  belong  to  Amos;  and,  if  so,  they  illus- 
trate impressively  the  sense  of  natural  grandeur 
nourished  in  him  by  his  mountain  home. 

While  Amos  was  a  resident  of  Judah,  his  pro- 
phetic message  was  delivered  in  and  to  Israel. 
This  fact  raises  an  interesting  question  with 
reference  to  the  relation  of  his  message  to  Judah. 
Did  Amos  mean  to  except  Judah  from  the  doom 
pronounced  upon  Israel  and  the  neighboring 
peoples?  Or  did  he  mean  to  include  Judah  in 
the  condemnation  of  the  northern  kingdom?  At 
first  it  might  seem  that  this  question  was  defi- 
nitely answered  by  2.  4,  5.  But  this  passage,  as 
compared  with  the  other  oracles  of  doom,  is  so 
general  and   colorless  that  it  is  commonly  and 

61 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

justly,  at  least  in  its  present  form,  assigned  to 
a  later  hand.  There  are,  however,  other  indi- 
cations that  Amos  had  no  thought  of  sparing 
the  southern  kingdom.  In  6.  iff.  the  dwellers 
in  Zion  are  condemned  along  with  those  in 
Samaria;  in  3.  1,  2  "the  whole  family"  brought 
up  from  Egypt  is  addressed;  2.  10  likewise 
applies  to  the  entire  nation,  and  6.  14  probably 
defines  the  limits  of  the  whole  Hebrew  people 
rather  than  those  of  simply  the  northern  king- 
dom. In  addition  to  this,  there  was  no  reason, 
as  we  learn  from  Isaiah,  why  Judah  should  not 
have  come  under  the  same  condemnation  as 
Israel.  Moral  and  religious  conditions  were 
essentially  the  same  in  both  kingdoms,  and  that 
a  man  of  such  stern  and  impartial  temper  as 
Amos  should  have  exempted  Judah  from  punish- 
ment because  of  narrow  patriotic  motives  is. 
of  course,  incredible.  We  must,  therefore,  hold 
that  Amos  meant  to  include  Judah  in  the  com- 
mon doom  that  was  to  befall  Israel  and  the  sur- 
rounding nations. 

But  if  so,  the  question  still  remains  as  to  why 
Amos  chose  Bethel  rather  than  Jerusalem  as  the 
scene  of  his  ministry.  For  this  choice  there  must 
have  been  some  reason.  The  probable  answer 
is  that  he  looked  upon  the  two  branches  of  the 
Israelitic  people  as  essentially  one,  and  that  of 
the  two  the  northern  was  the  more  important. 

62 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

The  center  of  the  national  life  was  to  be  found 
there.  Bethel,  therefore,  the  royal  sanctuary  of 
the  northern  realm,  was  a  strategic  place  for  a 
prophet  to  begin  his  ministry.  His  message 
would  there  produce  the  most  immediate  and 
powerful  effect.  Furthermore,  it  is  to  be  borne 
in  mind  that  the  account  of  the  ministry  of  Amos 
which  has  come  down  to  us  is  extremely  frag- 
mentary. Only  one  incident  from  it  is  recorded, 
namely,  the  prophet's  conflict  with  the  priest 
Amaziah  (7.  10-17).  This  conflict  probably  put 
an  end  to  the  activity  of  Amos  in  Bethel.  But 
from  this  it  by  no  means  follows  that  he  may 
not  have  worked  elsewhere,  in  Judah  as  well  as 
in  Israel.  It  is  indeed  a  priori  improbable  that 
such  a  man  as  he  was  permanently  silenced. 

Amos  disclaims  being  a  prophet  or  the  son  of. 
a  prophet  (7.  14).  By  this  he  means  that  he  did 
not  belong  to  the  prophetic  order,  and  so  had  not 
received  the  training  of  a  professional  prophet. 
By  occupation  he  was  a  shepherd  and  "a  dresser 
of  sycamore  trees"  (1.  1 ;  7.  14).  There  is  some 
question  as  to  what  the  function  of  "a  dresser  of 
sycamore  trees"  was,  and  some  question  also  as 
to  whether  this  is  the  correct  translation  of  the 
original.  But,  in  any  case,  Amos  here  desig- 
nates himself  as  a  man  of  lowly  station.  He 
belonged  to  the  poorer  classes  and  made  his  liv- 
ing by  humble  toil.     In  view  of  this   fact  one 

63 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

naturally  wonders  how  he  acquired  the  degree 
of  culture  which  he  manifestly  possessed.  The 
answer  is  that  conditions  in  the  East  were  differ- 
ent from  what  they  are  with  us.  "Among  the 
Hebrews,"  as  W.  Robertson  Smith  says,  "knowl- 
edge and  oratory  were  not  affairs  of  professional 
education,  or  dependent  for  their  cultivation  on 
wealth  and  social  status.  The  sum  of  book- 
learning  was  small ;  men  of  all  ranks  mingled 
with  that  Oriental  freedom  which  is  foreign  to 
our  habits;  shrewd  observation,  a  memory  reten- 
tive of  traditional  lore,  and  the  faculty  of 
original  observation  took  the  place  of  laborious 
study  as  the  ground  of  acknowledged  intellectual 
preeminence."  The  social  position  of  Amos, 
then,  was  no-  bar  to  his  equipping  himself  with 
the  culture  of  the  day.  His  eyes  and  ears  were 
both  kept  open.  From  travelers  he  learned  of 
Assyria,  of  Damascus,  of  Egypt,  and  of  the 
smaller  nations  round  about  Israel.  Indeed,  he 
may  himself  have  visited  these  lands.  He  knew 
something  of  their  history  and  of  present  con- 
ditions in  them.  His  own  people  he  watched 
closely.  With  their  past  history  he  was  thor- 
oughly familiar.  He  knew  that  Jehovah  had 
brought  them  up  from  the  land  of  Egypt,  that 
he  had  led  them  forty  yearS  in  the  wilderness, 
that  he  had  delivered  into  their  hands  the  land 
of  the  Amorite,  and  that  he  had  raised  up  for 
64 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

them  prophets  and  Nazirites  for  their  instruc- 
tion (2.  9-12).  He  also  knew  that  in  spite  of 
all  this  they  had  been  a  wayward  people,  and 
that  to  recall  them  from  their  evil  way  Jehovah 
had  sent  them  famine  and  drought,  blasting  and 
mildew,  war,  pestilence,  and  earthquake  (4.  6- 
11),  but  all  to  no  avail.  At  present  they  were 
prosperous.  But  this  fact  did  not  deceive  the 
prophet.  His  keen  eve  pierced  the  thin  veil  of 
material  prosperity,  and  saw  beneath  it  an 
advanced  stage  of  decay.  So  corrupt  was  Israel 
that  something  serious,  he  felt,  must  occur  before 
long.  He  watched,  therefore,  the  course  of 
affairs  round  about  him,  both  at  home  and 
abroad,  with  the  keenest  interest,  and  kept  his 
ear  close  to  the  ground  waiting  for  the  footfall 
of  coming  events. 

It  is  a  matter  of  interest  to  know  how  the 
prophetic  call  came  to  him.  He  himself  says 
that  Jehovah  "took"  him  from  following  the 
flock.  This  implies  a  sudden  seizure  by  a  power 
not  of  himself.  Such  is  also  the  purport  of  3.  8, 
where  the  prophet  says :  "The  lion  hath  roared ; 
who  will  not  fear?  The  Lord  Jehovah  hath 
spoken ;  who  can  but  prophesy  ?"  There  was, 
as  it  were,  a  burning  fire  shut  up  in  his  bones 
which  compelled  him  to  speak.  Someone  has 
said  that  there  are  two  classes  of  preachers — the 
good  preachers  who  have  something  to  say,  and 

65 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

the  poor  preachers  who  have  to  say  something. 
But  there  is  yet  another  and  higher  class.  It 
consists  of  those  who  both  have  something  to 
say  and  who  have  to  say  it.  Such  are  the 
prophets.  Such  a  one  was  Amos.  He  did  not, 
simply  as  a  result  of  reflection  on  conditions  at 
home  and  abroad,  conclude  that  Assyria  would 
probably  conquer  Israel  and  that  it  was  therefore 
his  duty,  a  duty  imposed  by  Jehovah,  to  declare 
this  truth  to  the  people  of  Israel.  It  is  a  mistake 
to  suppose  that  the  peril  from  Assyria  was  so 
manifest  in  the  time  of  Amos  that  "what 
requires  explanation  is  not  so  much  that  Amos 
was  aware  of  it  as  that  the  rulers  and  people  of 
Israel  were  so  blind  to  the  impending  doom" 
(W.  Robertson  Smith).  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
Amos  nowhere  mentions  the  Assyrians  by  name, 
unless  we  follow  the  Septuagint  and  read  in  3.  9 
"Assyria"  instead  of  "Ashdod."  No  doubt,  he 
thought  at  times  of  Assyria  as  the  instrument  of 
Jehovah's  wrath  (5.  27),  but  he  does  not  say 
so  definitely.  On  this  point  he  was  apparently 
uncertain  (3.  9-12).  And  such  we  know  was  the 
case  with  Hosea  (9.  3;  11.  5;  8.  13;  10.  6). 
Doom  was  to  come,  but  whether  from  Egypt  or 
Assyria  was  left  undetermined.  It  might  come 
from  either  land.  So  it  was  not  political 
calculation  that  lay  at  the  root  of  Amos's  mes- 
sage of  judgment.  That  he  was  gifted  with 
66 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

political  insight,  superior  to  that  of  the  profes- 
sional politicians  of  his  day,  is  open  to  question. 
In  any  case,  he  nowhere  bases  his  message  upon 
considerations  of  this  kind.  That  Israel  was  to 
go  into  captivity  came  to  him  rather  as  an  intui- 
tion, and  an  intuition  of  such  an  unusual  char- 
acter that  he  had  no  doubt  of  its  divine  source. 
In  the  attainment  of  this  intuition,  or  premoni- 
tion, political  observation  no  doubt  played  a 
part,  as  did  also  reflection  on  the  sins  of  Israel. 
The  latter,  indeed,  was  more  important  than  the 
former.  But  over  and  above  all  rational  proc- 
esses of  this  kind,  there  was  in  the  call  of  the 
prophet  an  element  that  defies  analysis,  a  mys- 
terious something  which  carried  with  it  the  con- 
viction that  the  doom  of  Israel  was  an  immediate 
revelation  of  God,  and  which  filled  the  prophet 
with  an  irresistible  impulse  to  declare  it  unto 
others.  An  adequate  scientific  explanation  of 
the  source  of  this  message  is  impossible.  It  had 
its  roots  in  those  deeps  of  the  human  spirit  where 
there  is  immediate  communion  with  the  Spirit  of 
God. 

In  order  to  understand  the  full  import  of  this 
message  of  doom  it  is  necessary  to  fix  clearly  in 
mind  two  important  facts  that  are  frequently 
overlooked.  The  first  is  the  religious  significance 
of  the  nation  to  the  ancient  Israelite.  With  us 
the  individual   is  the  unit   of  value  in   religion. 

67 


# 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

Our  country,  however  much  we  may  love  it,  is 
not  necessary  to  our  religious  life.  Banishment 
from  it,  no  matter  how  much  we  might  regret  it, 
would  not  necessarily  affect  our  deepest  religious 
interests.  Our  relation  to  God  would  still  be  the 
same,  and  we  would  still  have  the  same  hope  of 
salvation  and  eternal  life.  Not  so,  howevrer,  the 
ancient  Hebrew.  With  him  the  nation  over- 
shadowed  the  individual.  It  was  through  the 
nation,  through  the  sanctuaries  in  the  land  of 
Israel,  that  the  individual  entered  into  fellow- 
ship with  Jehovah.  Only  in  Canaan,  therefore, 
could  he  lead  a  life  of  full  communion  with  God. 
Every  other  land  was  to  him  an  unclean  land 
(7.  17).  To  live  in  Assyria  was  to  be  compelled 
to  eat  unclean  food  (Hos.  9.  3f.).  Life  in  that 
land  had  for  him  no  sanctity.  It  was  cut  off 
from  Jehovah.  National  exile,  therefore,  to 
him  was  a  far  more  serious  matter  than  it  would 
be  to  us  to-day.  It  was  in  a  sense  the  sum  of  all 
evils.  It  meant  the  blotting  out  of  all  his  highest 
hopes;  it  meant  the  annihilation  of  all  that  had 
given  sacredness  to  life. 

But  even  more  important  than  this  popular 
religious  nationalism  is  the  further  fact  that  the 
idea  of  doom  in  Amos  and  the  prophets  generally 
is  larger  than  that  of  any  particular  calamity. 
The  captivity  of  Israel  was  only  a  part  of  a  more 
general  catastrophe.  Back  of  all  the  threaten- 
68 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

ings  of  the  prophets  lay  the  idea  of  a  great  world- 
judgment.  This  idea  did  not  originate,  as  is  fre- 
quently asserted,  with  the  prophet  Zephaniah.  It 
formed  the  background  of  all  the  literary 
prophets,  and  was  current  in  Israel  before  their 
time.  The  people  of  Israel  had  the  idea  that 
there  would  be  a  great  day  of  the  Lord,  in  which 
Jehovah  would  assert  his  supremacy  over  all  the 
nations  of  the  world.  In  the  ruin  and  tumult  of 
this  great  day  they  themselves  expected  to  be 
saved.  It  was  to  be  unto  them  a  day  of  light  and 
not  of  darkness  (5.  18).  Evil  would  befall  the 
other  peoples,  but  it  would  not  overtake  them 
(9.  10;  6.  3;  Isa.  28.  15).  Such  was  apparently 
the  common  view  when  Amos  appeared  upon  the 
scene.  He  accepted  the  idea  of  such  a  general 
day  of  doom,  and  began  by  applying  it  to  the 
neighboring  nations  (1.  3  to  2.  3),  but  then  sud- 
denly turned  and  declared  that  it  would  fall  with 
special  severity  upon  Israel  herself  (2.  6-16). 
She  would  be  rescued,  he  ironically  said,  "as  the 
shepherd  rescues  out  of  the  mouth  of  the  lion 
two  legs  or  a  piece  of  an  ear"  (3.  12).  In  other 
words,  she  was  doomed  to  practically  complete 
destruction. 

Her  doom,  however,  was  not  an  isolated  one. 
Nor  did  it  consist  simply  in  the  sufferings  of  war 
and  captivity.  In  intension  as  well  as  extension 
the  prophetic  idea  of  doom  was  more  significant 

69 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

than  has  commonly  been  supposed.  Destructive 
war  was  to  come,  but  it  was  not  the  only  form 
under  which  the  approaching  catastrophe  was 
conceived,  nor  was  it  the  end  of  the  whole  matter. 
Even  after  the  Israelites  have  been  carried  into 
captivity,  the  sword  of  Jehovah,  we  are  told,  will 
pursue  them  and  slay  them  (9.  4).  »'  From  this  it 
is  evident  that  the  question  with  which  Amos 
was  dealing  was  not  simply  one  of  the  weal  or 
woe  of  the  nation.  His  problem  was  a  higher 
one — it  was  one  of  life  and  death  (5.  4-6,  14, 
15).  These  terms  are  nt)t  defined  for  us:  '  But 
they  must  be  regarded  as.eschatological,  as  terms 
resonant  with  the  note  o'f  finality  and  'eternity. 
Only  as  we  realize  this,  only  as  we  put  back  of 
the  prophetic  utterances  the  belief  in  the  speedy 
and  final  coming  of  Jehovah,  can  we  fully  appre- 
ciate the  significance  of  these  utterances  and  the 
passion  which  was  put  into  them.  The  prophets 
were  not  dealing  with  a  merely  temporary  polit- 
ical question,  that  of  the  existence  of  Israel. 
To  them  the  doom  or  redemption  of  Israel  was 
only  a  part  of  a  great  and  ultimate  manifesta- 
tion of  Jehovah,  which  had  all  the  significance 
for  them  that  individual  destiny  has  for  us. 
Hence  the  problem  with  which  Amos  and  the 
other  prophets  were  dealing  was  at  bottom  the 
same  as  that  with  which  religion  is  grappling  to- 
day and  has  been  grappling  through  all  the  ages 

70 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

of  human  history — the  problem  of  life  and  death, 
the  problem  of  salvation. 

Bearing  this  in  mind,  we  turn  now  to  the  book 
of  Amos.  It  is  unusually  simple  and  orderly  in 
its  arrangement.  Apart  from  the  concluding 
section  (9.  8-15)  it  is  made  up  of  three  main 
divisions.  In  the  first  two  chapters  we  have 
eight  oracles  of  judgment;  in  chapters  three  to 
six  there  are  a  number  of  sermons  of  judgment; 
and  in  chapters  seven  to  nine  we  have  five  visions 
of  judgment.  Each  of  the  main  divisions  of  the 
book  thus  has  judgment  as  its  theme.  Oracles, 
sermons,  and  visions  all  center  about  this  idea. 
And  so  the  motto  placed  at  the  beginning  (1.  2) 
is  true  to  the  character  of  the  book  as  a  whole 
with  the  exception  of  the  concluding  verses. 

Jehovah  will  roar  from  Zion, 

And  utter  his  voice  from  Jerusalem ; 

And  the   pastures   of  the   shepherds   shall   mourn, 

And  the  top  of  Carmel  shall  wither. 

Some  reject  this  verse  as  a  later  addition  to  the 
text,  but  the  paradoxical  form  in  which  it  is  cast 
is  so  characteristic  of  Amos  (3.  2;  4.  4;  9.  7) 
that  it  carries  within  itself  the  stamp  of  its  own 
genuineness.  The  voice  of  Jehovah  in  the  roar 
of  the  thunder  would  naturally  suggest  a  refresh- 
ing rain,  but  here  it  is  followed  by  a  withering 

7i 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

drought,  which  symbolizes  the  approaching  deso 
lation  of  the  land. 

This  desolation  is  conceived  of  as  due  to  vari- 
ous causes,  but  the  one  most  frequently  referred 
to  is  war.  Some  foreign  foe  will  invade  the  land 
whom  the  Israelitic  soldiery  will  be  powerless  to 
withstand.  The  war  will  therefore  be  extraor- 
dinarily destructive  of  life.  The  city  that  goes 
forth  a  thousand  will  have  but  a  hundred  left, 
and  the  one  that  goes  forth  a  hundred  will  have 
only  ten  left  (5.  3).  Nine  tenths  of  Israel's 
warriors  will  thus  be  slain.  But  not  only  will 
men  fall  in  battle — the  war  will  also  be  accom- 
panied by  famine.  The  fair  virgins  and  the 
young  men  will  faint  from  thirst  (8.  13).  And 
not  only  will  there  be  a  famine  of  bread  and  a 
thirst  for  water,  but  also  of  hearing  the  words  of 
Jehovah.  Men  "shall  wander  from  sea  to  sea, 
and  from  the  north  even  to  the  east ;  they  shall 
run  to  and  fro  to  seek  the  word  of  Jehovah,  and 
shall  not  find  it"  (8.  11,  12).  The  parching  of 
the  soul  will  thus  be  added  to  the  starvation  of 
the  body.  In  addition  to  this,  there  will  be  a 
pestilence,  a  scourge  that  frequently  in  the  East 
follows  in  the  wake  of  war.  One  especially 
vivid  scene  from  this  threatened  plague  is  pre- 
served for  us.  The  verses  in  which  it  is 
described  (6.  9,  10)  are  somewhat  obscure,  but 
the  meaning  is  probably  this :  There  are  ten  men 

72 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

in  a  house.  All  have  died  but  one,  and  he  has 
withdrawn  to  the  innermost  part  of  the  house, 
thinking  thus  to  hide  himself  from  the  divine 
anger.  A  relative  coming  to  bury  the  dead  dis- 
covers that  there  is  still  one  alive.  Calling  to 
him  in  his  inner  room,  he  asks  if  there  is  any  one 
else  alive  with  him.  He  replies  "No,"  and  then, 
as  he  is  about  to  add  some  formula  containing 
the  divine  name,  the  relative  interrupts  him,  say- 
ing :  "Hush !  It  is  not  permitted  to  make  men- 
tion of  the  name  of  Jehovah."  So  terrible,  the 
prophet  here  means  to  say,  will  be  the  gloom  that 
will  fall  upon  the  people,  and  so  great  their  super- 
stitious fear  that  they  will  not  dare  even  to  men- 
tion the  name  of  their  God,  lest  it  rouse  him  to 
new  anger  against  them.  Thus  will  they  be 
afflicted  from  one  end  of  the  land  to  the  other. 
"The  dead  bodies,"  therefore,  "shall  be  many ;  in 
every  place  shall  they  cast  them  forth  with 
silence"  (8.  3). 

In  the  midst  of  such  carnage,  famine,  and 
pestilence,  the  whole  state  is  to  go  down  into 
ruin.  No  part  of  it  will  escape,  and  no  class  will 
be  exempt.  The  city  of  Samaria,  with  all  that  is 
therein,  will  be  delivered  up  (6.  8),  and  the 
people  will  be  afflicted  from  the  entrance  of 
Hamath  to  the  brook  of  the  Arabah  (6.  14). 
The  judgment  will  fall  with  special  severity  upon 
the  luxurious  nobles,  but  the  suffering  poor  will 

73 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

not  escape.  "Woe,"  says  the  prophet,  "to  them 
that  are  at  ease  in  Zion,  and  to  them  that  are 
secure  in  the  mountain  of  Samaria,  the  notable 
men,"  the  rich,  those  who  are  content  with  pres- 
ent conditions  and  who  therefore  put  off  the  evil 
day  (6.  1-3).  But  woe,  also,  he  says,  to  those 
who  long  for  the  day  of  Jehovah,  the  oppressed 
poor,  who  see  in  the  expected  miraculous  inter- 
vention of  Jehovah  the  hope  of  better  things  for 
themselves  (5.  18).  In  this  hope  they  will  be 
disappointed.  The  day  of  Jehovah  will  be  to 
them  darkness  and  not  light.  In  that  day  the 
winter-house  and  the  summer-house,  the  houses 
of  ivory  and  the  great  houses,  will  perish  (3. 
15),  and  so  also  the  little  house  (6.  11).  And, 
finally,  the  sanctuaries  themselves,  the  last  refuge 
of  the  nation,  will  be  destroyed ;  and  the  broken 
capitals  and  beams  will  be  used  to  break  the 
heads  of  the  few  who  seek  to  escape  (9.  1).  So 
complete  and  so  terrible  will  the  catastrophe  be 
that  even  nature  cannot  remain  unmoved  at  the 
sight.  Both  earthquake  and  eclipse  will  attend 
it.  The  land  "shall  rise  up  wholly  like  the  River ; 
and  it  shall  be  troubled  and  sink  again  like  the 
River  of  Egypt."  And  the  sun  will  go  down  at 
noon,  and  the  earth  be  darkened  in  the  clear  day 
(8.  9,  10). 

Of  the  certainty  of  this  impending  ruin  the 
prophet   has   no  doubt.      Before  his  vision  the 

74 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

snare  is  already  springing  up  to  catch  its  victim ; 
the  lion  with  his  roar  is  already  leaping  upon  his 
prey  (3.  4,  5).  No  escape  is  possible.  The  evil 
eye  of  Jehovah — the  magical  evil  eye  of  the 
East — is  upon  his  people  (9.  8).  His  gaze 
they  cannot  elude. 

Though  they  dig  into  Sheol, 
Thence  shall  my  hand  take  them; 

And  though  they  climb  up  to  heaven, 
Thence  will  I  bring  them  down. 

And  though  they  hide  themselves  in  the  top  of  Carmel, 
I  will  search  and  take  them  out  thence; 

And  though  they  be  hid  from  my  sight  in  the  bottom  of 
the  sea, 
Thence  will  I  command  the  serpent,  and  it  shall  bite  them. 

And  though  they  go  into  captivity  before  their  enemies, 
Thence    will    I    command    the    sword,    and    it    shall    slay 
them  (9.  2-4). 

So  certain,  indeed,  to  the  prophet's  mind  is  this 
impending  destruction  that  he  regards  it  as  al- 
ready accomplished ;  and  adopting  the  peculiar 
elegiac  metre  of  his  day,  sings  a  funeral  song 
over  Israel. 

The  virgin  of  Israel  is  fallen; 

She  shall  no  more  rise : 
She  is  cast  down  upon  her  land ; 

There  is  none  to  raise  her  up  (5.  2). 

But  prominent  as  the  idea  of  judgment  is  in 
his  book,   Amos   was   not  simply  a  prophet  of 

75 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

doom.  He  did  not  merely  predict  the  destruc- 
tion of  his  own  people.  Had  he  done  only  this, 
we  should  have  had  no  more  than  a  psycholog- 
ical interest  in  him,  such  an  interest  as  we  have 
in  other  predicters  of  evil  who  have  appeared 
shortly  before  some  great  catastrophe.  For 
instance,  four  or  five  months  before  the  earth- 
quake that  destroyed  Messina,  during  the  hot- 
test days  of  the  summer,  there  appeared  in  the 
streets  of  that  city  one  of  those  wandering  reli- 
gious fanatics  whom  the  Italians  call  "Nazar- 
enes."  Stopping  at  the  busiest  corners  and  gain- 
ing the  attention  of  passers-by  by  the  ringing  of 
a  bell,  he  addressed  them  in  these  words :  "Be 
warned,  take  heed  and  repent,  ye  men  of 
Messina!  This  year  shall  not  end  before  your 
city  is  utterly  destroyed."  A  few  days  before 
the  end  of  the  year  this  prediction  was  remark- 
ably fulfilled.  The  question  then  naturally  arises 
as  to  whether  this  fulfillment  was  simply  a  coin- 
cidence or  whether  the  "Nazarene"  had  a  real 
presentiment  of  the  impending  disaster.  But, 
however  interesting  this  question  may  be  from 
the  psychological  point  of  view,  it  has  no  further 
significance — regardless  of  the  answer  that  may 
be  given  to  it.  And  so  it  would  be  with  the 
words  of  Amos,  had  he  been  merely  a  predicter 
of  doom.  No  religious  importance  would  attach 
to  them. 

76 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

What  makes  Amos  a  significant  figure  in  the 
history  of  religion  is  the  great  religious  concep- 
tions underlying  his  message  of  doom.  In  order 
to  understand  these  conceptions  it  will  be  well 
to  contrast  them  with  the  popular  beliefs  of  his 
day.  The  people  about  him  felt  certain  of  the 
divine  favor  for  two  reasons :  First,  they  were 
the  chosen  of  Jehovah.  He  had  brought  them 
up  out  of  Egypt  and  so  would  certainly  continue 
to  care  for  them.  Secondly,  they  were  atten- 
tive to  all  the  details  of  his  worship.  They  vis- 
ited the  sanctuaries,  they  kept  the  feasts,  they  of- 
fered the  sacrifices  with  scrupulous  care.  What 
more,  they  thought,  could  any  God  require? 
Fidelity,  then,  to  religious  rites  and  the  enjoy- 
ment of  a  unique  relation  to  Jehovah  were  the 
two  grounds  on  which  they  expected  exemption 
from  punishment  on  the  approaching  day  of 
doom. 

To  Amos,  however,  these  two  pillars  of  pop- 
ular confidence  were  broken  reeds.  Neither 
offered  the  slightest  basis  for  any  assurance  of 
the  divine  favor.  Indeed,  to  him  they  were  the 
arch-heresies  of  his  time.  "You  only,"  he  repre- 
sents Jehovah  as  saying,  "have  I  known  of  all 
the  families  of  the  earth;  therefore  I  will"  not 
protect  you,  but  "visit  upon  you  all  your  iniqui- 
ties" (3.  2).  It  was  true  that  Jehovah  had 
chosen  them  to  be  his  peculiar  people.     He  stood 

77 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

in  an  especially  close  relation  to  them.  But  this 
did  not  mean,  as  they  supposed,  that  they  had  a 
monopoly  of  the  divine  favor.  It  did  not  mean 
that  they  would  certainly  escape  when  the  day 
of  judgment  came.  It  simply  meant  moral  op- 
portunity. Jehovah  had  given  them  the  opportu- 
nity to  be  a  better  people  than  any  other.  He 
had  made  revelations  of  his  character  to  them 
such  as  he  had  made  to  no  other  nation.  This 
added  light,  however,  instead  of  lessening  their 
responsibility,  only  increased  it,  and  made  it  all 
the  more  certain  that  they  would  be  called  to 
a  strict  account  for  their  misdoings.  In  Jeho- 
vah's government  of  the  world  there  was  absolute 
and  impartial  justice.  No  favoritism,  therefore, 
would  be  shown  Israel.  "Are  ye  not  as  the 
children  of  the  Ethiopians  unto  me,  O  children 
of  Israel?  saith  Jehovah.  Have  not  I  brought 
up  Israel  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  the 
Philistines  from  Caphtor,  and  the  Syrians  from 
Kir?"  (9.  7.)  Appeal  had  evidently  been  fre- 
quently made  in  the  day  of  Amos  to  the  de- 
liverance from  Egypt  as  evidence  that  Jehovah 
had  treated  and  would  continue  to  treat  Israel 
with  special  consideration.  But  the  prophet  here 
declares  that  this  appeal  was  mistaken.  Jeho- 
vah's protecting  care  was  not  confined  to  Israel. 
It  was  universal.  It  had  brought  the  Philistines 
from    Caphtor,    and    the    Syrians     from    Kir; 

78 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

nothing,  then,  in  Israel's  outward  history 
afforded  her  any  ground  for  presuming  upon  the 
divine  clemency.  Whatever  preeminence  she 
possessed  was  to  be  found  in  the  special  revela- 
tion which  Jehovah  had  made  to  her  of  his  char- 
acter and  will.  This  revelation,  however,  she 
had  spurned.  She,  therefore,  had  no  advantage 
over  other  nations.  She  meant  no  more  to  Je- 
hovah than  the  distant  and  despised  Ethiopians. 
Such  was  the  manner  in  which  Amos  dealt 
with  the  national  pretension  of  his  day.  With 
the  popular  trust  in  rites  and  ceremonies  he  was 
even  harsher  still.  "Come,"  he  says,  "to  Bethel, 
and" — not  "offer  sacrifices,"  as  we  would  expect, 
but — "transgress;  to  Gilgal,  and  multiply  trans- 
gression" (4.  4).  By  this  paradoxical  and  iron- 
ical invitation  Amos  means  to  say  that  the  sacri- 
fices which  the  Israelites  offered  at  their  sanctu- 
aries, instead  of  winning  the  divine  favor,  were 
really  equivalent  to  transgressions,  calling  forth 
the  divine  wrath.  To  many  in  Israel,  such  a 
thought  as  this  must  have  seemed  well-nigh  blas- 
phemous. Pilgrimages,  sacrifices,  and  tithes 
were  the  forms  in  which  piety  for  centuries  had 
expressed  itself.  They  must,  then,  be  acceptable 
to  Jehovah.  There  could  be  nothing  wrong  in 
them.  So  no  doubt  the  popular  mind  reasoned. 
And  it  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  Amos  meant 
to  condemn  all  rites  and  ceremonies  as  such.    He 

79 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

was  not  such  a  doctrinaire  as  to  be  blind  to  the 
fact  that  true  piety  needs  its  days  and  seasons 
and  outward  forms  for  its  proper  cultivation. 
What  he  objected  to  and  denounced  was  the  sub- 
stitution of  these  external  rites  for  the  inner 
spirit  of  piety.  In  and  of  themselves  the  rites 
were  innocent  enough  and  might  be  an  actual  aid 
to  true  religion,  but  as  a  substitute  for  righteous- 
ness they  were  an  abomination  in  the  sight  of 
God.     And  so  Jehovah  says : 

I  hate,  I  despise  your  feasts, 
And  I  will  take  no  delight  in  your  solemn  assemblies. 

Your  meal-offerings  I  will  not  accept; 
Neither    will    I    regard    the    peace    offerings    of   your    fat 
beasts. 

Take  thou  away  from  me  the  noise  of  thy  songs ; 
For  I  will  not  hear  the  melody  of  thy  viols. 

But  let  justice  roll  down  as  waters, 
And  righteousness  as  a  mighty  stream  (5.  21-24). 

This  is  one  of  the  great  passages  in  the  prophetic 
literature.  In  it  we  have  expressed  for  the  first 
time,  so  far  as  we  know,  with  perfect  clearness 
and  finality  the  absolute  worthlessness  of  all 
mere  ceremonialism  and  the  supreme  value,  in 
the  religious  life,  of  righteousness.  Henceforth, 
in  religion,  the  one  essential  thing  will  be  the 
right  attitude  of  mind  and  heart.  The  only  wor- 
ship hereafter  that  will  be  acceptable  to  Jehovah 
will  be  worship  in  spirit  and  in  truth. 
80 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

And  so,  as  against  the  popular  trust  in  sacri- 
fices, and  as  against  the  popular  belief  in  the  elec- 
tion of  Israel  and  the  common  assurance  that 
Jehovah  would  in  some  marvelous  way  intervene 
on  their  behalf  in  the  day  of  trouble,  Amos  laid 
down  the  principle  that  the  only  hope  of  Israel 
was  to  be  found  in  righteousness.  And  by  right- 
eousness he  meant  what  was  right  in  the  absolute 
sense  of  the  term,  both  objective  and  subjective; 
he  meant  that  which  forms  the  essence  of  all  true 
morality — respect  for  personality  in  oneself  and 
in  others.  It  was  because  the  Israelites  lacked 
this,  because  they  were  sinful,  that  doom  was 
about  to  come  upon  them.  The  approaching 
catastrophe  was  not  due  to  political  necessity  nor 
to  blind  chance,  it  was  a  penalty  inflicted  upon 
them  because  of  their  sin  (3.  3-6).  Accordingly, 
only  a  removal  of  their  sin  could  save  them. 

Sin  with  them  manifested  itself  in  various 
forms,  but  there  were  two  specific  evils  which 
Amos  especially  condemned.  First,  the  rich  op- 
pressed the  poor.  They  took  exactions  from 
them  of  wheat  (5.  11),  they  used  false  measures 
in  buying  and  selling  (8.  5),  and  fairly  crushed 
their  head  to  the  earth  (2.  7).  Secondly,  the 
judges,  to  whom  the  poor  appealed  for  relief, 
were  corrupt.  They  accepted  bribes  (5.  12),  and 
so  were  controlled  by  the  rich.  In  this  way  hu- 
man life  was  literally  bartered  away.     The  inno- 

81 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

cent  were  sold  for  silver  and  the  needy  for  a  pair  f 
of  shoes  (2.  6;  8.  6).  It  was  not,  however,  the 
smallness  of  the  amount  for  which  the  poor  were 
sold  that  stirred  the  indignation  of  the  prophet, 
but  the  fact  that  they  were  sold  at  all.  All 
money  in  his  estimate  was  base  when  compared 
with  the  value  of  human  life.  There  were  cer- 
tain common  rights  of  humanity  that  were  above 
all  price,  and  these  rights  the  ruling  classes  in 
Israel  were  persistently  disregarding.  To  Amos 
this  seemed  the  height  of  iniquity,  and  not  only 
the  height  of  iniquity  but  the  very  limit  of  gov- 
ernmental folly. 

Do  horses  run  upon  the  rock? 
Do  men  plow  the  sea  with  oxen? 

That  ye  have  turned  justice  into  gall, 
And  the  fruit  of  righteousness  into  wormwood?    (6.   12). 

One  might,  he  says,  as  well  try  to  plow  the  sea 
with  oxen  as  to  try  to  maintain  a  stable  national 
life  in  the  midst  of  such  a  perversion  of  justice. 

Thus  the  very  nature  of  human  government, 
as  well  as  the  principle  of  divine  retribution, 
made  it  certain  that  the  civic  injustice  rampant  in 
Israel  would  result  fatally  to  the  nation.  The 
only  way  that  it  could  be  avoided  was  by  a  com- 
plete change  of  conduct,  by  putting  humanity  in 
the  place  of  inhumanity,  and  justice  in  the  place 
of  injustice.  So  Amos  exhorts  them,  saying: 
82 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

"Seek  Jehovah,  and  ye  shall  live,"  and  "Seek 
good,  and  not  evil,  that  ye  may  live"  (5.  6,  14). 
These  two  exhortations  are  synonymous,  and 
express  more  clearly  than  any  other  utterances  in 
the  book  the  most  significant  element  in  the 
prophet's  teaching.  He  identifies  religion  abso- 
lutely with  the  moral  law.  To  seek  Jehovah  is 
to  seek  the  good.  There  is  no  other  way  of 
entering  into  fellowship  with  him.  This,  as  we 
have  already  seen,  was  a  conception  of  epoch- 
making  significance.  When  religion  busies  itself 
with  rites  and  ceremonies,  with  signs  and  omens, 
it  is  of  very  slight  value  to  the  world.  Indeed, 
it  usually  acts  as  a  bar  to  progress.  It  is  guided 
by  no  rational  principle,  and  so  tends  to  sanctify 
the  inconsistent,  absurd,  and  often  harmful 
usages  and  beliefs  of  the  past.  But  when  reli- 
gion is  identified  with  the  moral  nature,  all  this  is 
changed.  Religion  then  comes  to  be  the  chief 
conserving  force  in  society  and  a  most  powerful 
stimulus  to  the  development  of  man's  highest 
faculties.  Conscience,  from  this  point  of  view, 
is  the  one  way  of  approach  to  God,  and  those 
ethical  principles  which  lie  at  the  basis  of  every 
healthy  and  progressive  society  are  the  special 
objects  of  religious  concern.  It  was,  conse- 
quently, a  matter  of  the  utmost  importance  in  the 
history  of  religion  when  Amos  laid  down  the  law 
that  the  one  way  to  seek  Jehovah  is  to  seek  the 
83 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

good  and  not  the  evil.  This  truth  was  not  orig- 
inal with  Amos.  To  some  degree  it  had  been 
apprehended  centuries  before  his  time.  But  he, 
so  far  as  we  know,  was  the  first  to  differentiate 
it  from  the  popular  religion,  and  to  make  it  the 
one  fundamental  principle  of  all  true  religion. 
He  thus  stands  out  in  history  as  the  great  prophet 
of  moral  law. 

Our  study,  however,  of  the  teaching  of  Amos 
is  not  yet  complete.  At  the  close  of  the  book 
there  are  four  brief  words  of  hope  (9.  8,  9-10, 
11-12,  13-15).  These  words  are  commonly 
supposed  to  have  been  added  by  a  later  hand. 
They  are  inconsistent,  it  is  claimed,  with  the  pre- 
ceding message  of  doom.  For  Amos  to  have 
followed  up  his  bitter  denunciations  of  Israel 
with  such  promises  of  restoration  and  plenty  as 
we  here  find  would  have  been  to  break  the  point 
off  all  that  he  had  previously  said.  It  would  have 
been  to  "sink  back  lamely  into  the  delusion 
against  which  he  himself  had  fought."  "Shall 
the  illusion  triumph  over  its  destroyer,  the  God 
of  one's  wishes  over  the  God  of  historical  neces- 
sity?" asks  Wellhausen.  No  one  surely  could  be- 
lieve this  of  Amos.  Moreover,  it  is  urged  that 
if  he  had  entertained  any  hopes  of  future  glory 
for  Israel,  he  would  certainly  have  insisted  upon 
moral  regeneration  as  the  necessary  condition  of 

84 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

its  attainment  in  a  way  that  is  not  done  in  9. 
11-15. 

But  against  this  confident  rejection  of  the  con- 
cluding section  of  the  book  of  Amos  there  has 
in  recent  years  been  a  reaction.  Many  distin- 
guished scholars  have  come  out  in  favor  of  its 
authenticity.  One  reason  for  this  change  is  the 
growing  conviction  that  we  know  so  little  about 
the  composition  of  the  prophetic  books  and  the 
conditions  of  thought  at  the  time  they  were 
written,  that  we  need  more  convincing  reasons 
than  are  frequently  given  before  any  particular 
passage  is  denied  to  its  traditional  author.  Want 
of  connection  with  what  precedes  or  follows  is  no 
necessary  indication  that  a  verse  or  passage  is  a 
later  addition.  The  prophetic  oracles  were  fre- 
quently grouped  together  in  a  purely  mechanical 
way  according  to  the  principle  of  catchwords. 
It  is  then  a  mistake  to  expect  in  them  a  sustained 
continuity  of  thought.  Furthermore,  it  is  quite 
possible  that  ideas  that  seem  mutually  inconsist- 
ent to  us  did  not  seem  such  to  the  prophets  them- 
selves. Many  of  the  ideas  which  at  present  live 
peacefully  together  within  us  are  really  formally 
or  logically  inconsistent  with  each  other,  only  we 
are  not  aware  of  it.  Future  ages,  however,  will 
be.  In  the  second  place,  we  now  have  evidence 
that  it  was  customary  not  only  among  the  Israel- 
ite but  also  the  Egyptian  seers  to  combine  to- 

85 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

gether  prophecies  of  doom  and  hope.  One 
seemed  to  imply  the  other,  as  fear  and  hope  rise 
alternately  in  the  human  breast.  What  the  ori- 
gin of  the  belief  in  a  glorious  future  was  we  do 
not  know.  But  we  know  that  it  was  current 
in  Israel  before  the  time  of  Amos.  It  is  a  priori 
probable,  therefore,  that  it,  as  well  as  the  belief 
in  a  day  of  doom,  had  its  place  in  his  book. 

In  addition  to  these  considerations  is  the 
further  fact  that  the  preexilic  prophets  were  not 
merely  preachers  of  repentance;  they  had  also 
the  function  of  encouraging  faith.  They  had 
their  own  disciples  and  fellow  believers  whom 
they  needed  to  cheer.  Then,  too,  even  such  an 
apparently  relentless  prophet  of  doom  as  Amos 
had  a  more  tender  side  to  his  nature.  When  the 
nation  was  at  first  threatened  with  destruction  he 
interceded  for  them  not  once  but  twice,  saying, 
"O  Lord  Jehovah,  forgive,  I  beseech  thee:  how 
shall  Jacob  stand?  for  he  is  small"  (7.  2,  5). 
And  when  calamity  after  calamity  befell  them 
without  accomplishing  its  purpose,  he  voiced 
with  infinite  tenderness  the  heartache  of  God  as 
he  repeated  over  and  over  again  the  refrain,  "Yet 
have  ye  not  returned  unto  me,  saith  Jehovah"  (4. 
6-1 1 ).  There  are,  it  is  true,  some  passages  in 
which  the  doom  of  Israel  is  apparently  an- 
nounced as  absolutely  final  and  unavoidable  (7. 
7-9;  8.  1-3;  9.  1-4).  But  over  against  these  are 
86 


AMOS  THE  PROPHET  OF  MORAL  LAW 

to  be  placed  those  exhortations  in  which  the 
prophet  bids  his  hearers  seek  Jehovah  that  they 
may  live  (5.  4-6,  14,  15).  Evidently,  then,  in 
spite  of  all  his  dark  forecasts,  Amos  was  not  al- 
together without  hope  that  Israel  might  be  saved, 
and  certainly  was  not  without  the  conviction  that 
some  at  least  would  "live."  To  picture  him  as 
a  kind  of  ethical  fatalist  who  only  passively 
mirrored  the  approaching  judgment,  as  does  the 
most  elaborate  recent  commentary  on  his  book, 
and  to  say  that  "he  was  indifferent  to  everything 
that  had  to  do  with  purpose  and  motive,"  is 
utterly  to  misrepresent  his  true  character.  He 
was  a  man  of  intense  passion,  who  saw  purpose 
everywhere.  The  teleological  element,  instead  of 
being  absent  from  his  book,  permeates  the  whole 
of  it.  That  such  a  man  as  he  should  not  have  re- 
flected on  what  would  take  place  after  the  de- 
struction of  Israel,  is  incredible.  The  truth, 
rather,  is  that,  like  the  other  prophets,  he  had  a 
very  definite  conviction  with  reference  to  the  ul- 
timate triumph  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  that 
it  was  this  conviction  that  made  him  bold  enough 
to  announce  with  such  fidelity  his  message  of 
doom.  The  destruction  of  Israel  was  never  the 
last  word  of  any  prophet.  Beyond  the  ruin 
would  rise  the  new  building  of  God.  Israel 
would  be  sifted  as  grain  is  sifted  in  a  sieve,  but 
not  the  least  kernel  would  fall  to  the  earth   (9. 

87 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

9).  Such  was  the  common  faith  of  the  prophets. 
And  such  is  the  faith  that  is  expressed  in  the 
closing  verses  of  the  book  of  Amos.  There  was 
to  be  a  glorious  future  for  the  people  of  God; 
but  Israel  must  first  be  purged ;  Gethsemane  and 
Calvary  must  precede  the  resurrection. 

But  while  Amos  thus  had  his  hopeful  outlook 
into  the  future,  this  was  a  subordinate  element 
in  his  teaching.  His  primary  task  was  to  assert 
the  claims  of  the  moral  law  as  over  against  the 
unspiritual  formalism  and  the  national  preten- 
sion of  his  time.  His  message  was  therefore 
necessarily  one  largely  of  doom.  His  chief  sig- 
nificance, however,  does  not  lie  in  this  message  of 
doom,  but  in  the  thoroughness  with  which  he 
moralized  the  conception  of  religion.  He  recog- 
nized no  sacramental  mysteries  as  of  any  value 
apart  from  moral  obedience,  and  he  allowed  no 
place  for  caste  or  exclusiveness  or  special  privi- 
lege in  religion.  There  were  from  his  point  of 
view  no  private  wires  and  no  subway  connections 
in  the  spiritual  realm.  The  religious  life  was 
something  to  be  lived  out  in  the  open,  in  the  sight 
and  within  the  reach  of  all.  He  thus  stood  for 
the  enthronement  of  conscience  in  religion.  This 
was  his  great  achievement.  To  seek  the  good  is 
to  seek  Jehovah,  and  to  seek  Jehovah  is  to  seek 
the  good. 


88 


CHAPTER  III 
HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

A  certain  amount  of  interest  has  always  at- 
tached to  Hosea  because  of  the  remarkable  story 
of  his  marriage.  But  it  is  only  comparatively 
recently  that  his  real  importance  has  come  to  be 
appreciated.  He,  like  Amos,  has  been  "discov- 
ered" by  the  modern  critic. 

The  trouble  with  the  older  study  of  the 
prophets  was  that  it  was  projected  against  a  false 
background.  It  assumed  that  the  Law  had 
already  been  given  in  its  totality,  and  that  the 
function  of  the  prophets  was  simply  to  enforce 
its  teaching.  No  originality,  therefore,  was  pos- 
sible to  them.  It  was  their  task  merely  to 
impress  upon  the  people  of  their  own  day,  and 
to  apply  to  their  own  times,  truths  handed  down 
from  the  past.  To  be  sure,  they  did  this  with 
great  skill  and  power.  But  such  an  achievement 
did  not  entitle  them  to  rank  with  the  creative 
geniuses  of  the  race.  It  simply  made  them  ef- 
fective preachers  or  gifted  poets.  It  did  not 
single  them  out  as  pioneers  in  any  great  move- 
ment of  the  human  spirit,  as  leaders  of  thought 

89 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

who  have  left  their  impress  upon  all  succeeding 
generations. 

Hence,  before  the  true  significance  of  the 
prophets  could  be  appreciated,  it  was  necessary 
that  the  traditional  view  with  reference  to  the 
origin  of  the  Law  be  modified.  And  this,  as  is 
well  known,  has  been  done  during  the  past  cen- 
tury. It  is  now  seen  that  the  Law  was  a  gradual 
development,  and  that  considerable  portions  of 
it  date  from  a  later  period  than  that  of  the  first 
group  of  literary  prophets.  These  men,  conse- 
quently, did  not  have  back  of  them  the  clearly  de- 
fined and  exalted  monotheism  of  the  Law  books, 
but  a  far  less  definite  body  of  religious  beliefs 
and  practices.  What  they  did,  therefore,  was 
not  merely  to  reproduce  the  teaching  of  the  past ; 
their  work  marked  an  important  step  forward. 
They  took  the  earlier  ideas,  crystallized  them  into 
fixed  principles,  reduced  them  to  a  consistent 
system  of  belief,  and  thus  made  them  the  basis 
of  the  mightiest  spiritual  movement  of  the  cen- 
turies. 

Only  as  we  realize  this  fact  can  we  properly 
appreciate  the  true  importance  of  the  prophets, 
especially  the  earliest  of  them,  Amos  and  Hosea. 
The  messages  delivered  by  these  men  were 
relatively  brief,  and  had  they  come  after  the 
completion  of  the  Law  would  not  have  been  espe- 
cially   significant.      What    gives    to    them    their 

90 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

extraordinary  importance  is  their  originality. 
The  book  of  Amos,  as  we  have  seen,  was  the 
earliest  in  which  religion  is  identified  absolutely 
with  the  moral  law.  Amos,  therefore,  may  be 
regarded  as  standing  at  the  head  of  all  those  who 
through  the  ages  have  sought  to  free  religion 
from  its  unnatural  alliance  with  superstition, 
ceremonialism,  selfishness,  and  tyranny,  and  who 
have  endeavored  to  identify  it  with  the  never- 
ceasing  struggle  of  the  human  mind  for  right- 
eousness, truth,  freedom,  and  social  progress. 
And  so  likewise  with  Hosea.  His  was  the  ear- 
liest book  in  which  religion  is  interpreted 
absolutely  in  the  terms  of  love.  He,  therefore, 
in  a  certain  sense  stands  at  the  head  of  all  those 
to  whom  religion  has  been  the  great  solace  of 
life,  to  whom  it  has  meant  redemption  from  sin 
and  triumph  over  the  world.  "There  is  no 
truth,"  says  George  Adam  Smith,  "uttered  by 
later  prophets  about  the  divine  grace,  which  we 
do  not  find  in  germ  in  him.  .  .  .  He  is  the  first 
prophet  of  grace,  Israel's  first  evangelist."  And 
Cornill  goes  still  farther,  saying,  "When  we  con- 
sider that  all  this  was  absolutely  new,  that  those 
thoughts  in  which  humanity  has  been  educated 
and  which  have  consoled  it  for  nearly  three  thou- 
sand years,  were  first  spoken  by  Hosea,  we  must 
reckon  him  among  the  greatest  religious  geniuses 
which  the  world  has  ever  produced."     In  this 

9i 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

latter  statement,  as  in  the  same  author's  estimate 
of  Amos,  there  is  a  considerable  element  of  ex- 
aggeration. Hosea's  doctrine  of  the  divine  love 
was  not  "absolutely  new."  But  it  was,  neverthe- 
less, expressed  with  a  clearness  and  finality 
unknown  before  his  time.  And  this  fact  entitles 
him  to  much  of  the  praise  here  given  him.  He 
was  undoubtedly  one  of  the  greatest  of  the 
prophets.  Along  with  Amos  and  Isaiah  he  laid 
the  foundations  of  literary  prophecy,  and  so 
must  be  regarded  as  one  of  the  most  important 
agents  through  whom  God  made  his  special  rev- 
elation of  himself  to  Israel. 

The  life  of  Hosea,  like  that  of  Amos,  is  for 
the  most  part  wrapped  in  obscurity.  Our  only 
source  of  information  concerning  it  is  his  book; 
and  from  it  there  is  very  little  that  can  be  ex- 
tracted with  certainty.  The  superscription  puts 
Hosea's  ministry  in  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  II, 
king  of  Israel,  and  in  the  reigns  of  Uzziah, 
Jotham,  Ahaz,  and  Hezekiah,  kings  of  Judah. 
The  names  of  these  Judaean  kings  were  probably 
added  by  some  later  scribe;  but  the  addition  is 
trustworthy  in  so  far  as  it  implies  that  Hosea's 
ministry  continued  beyond  the  reign  of  Jero- 
boam. Jeroboam  died  about  B.  C.  740,  after  a 
long  and  prosperous  reign.  He  was  succeeded 
by  his  son  Zechariah,  who  after  a  brief  reign  of 
six  months  was  assassinated  by  Shallum.  Shal- 
92 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

lum  ascended  the  throne,  and  after  ruling  for  a 
month  was  himself  put  to  death  by  Menahem. 
Menahem  ruled  for  two  or  three  years  and  was 
then  followed  by  his  son,  Pekahiah,  who  after  a 
reign  of  two  years  was  assassinated  by  Pekah. 
Pekah  ruled  for  a  year  or  two,  and  then  was 
slain  by  Hoshea,  who  ascended  the  throne  as  an 
Assyrian  vassal  and  was  the  last  of  the  kings  of 
Israel.  There  were  thus  within  eight  or  nine 
years,  from  B.  C.  740  to  about  732,  no  less  than 
seven  different  kings  of  Israel,  and  of  these  four 
were  assassinated  by  their  successors. 

The  period  then  following  the  death  of  Jero- 
boam II  was  one  of  anarchy.  The  kingdom  was 
on  the  road  to  ruin.  This  state  of  affairs  is 
clearly  reflected  in  the  last  eleven  chapters  of  the 
book  of  Hosea.  Here  we  read  again  and  again 
of  the  setting  up  of  kings  and  of  their  overthrow 
(7.  3-7;  8.  4;  10.  7,  15;  13.  iof.).  But  how 
far  into  this  period  of  confusion  and  anarchy 
Hosea's  ministry  extended  we  do  not  know. 
The  fact  that  his  book  contains  no  reference  to 
the  Syro-Ephraimitic  war  (B.  C.  734-733)  and 
no  allusion  to  the  immediately  following  invasion 
of  Gilead  and  Galilee  by  the  Assyrians,  suggests 
that  his  work  was  by  that  time  done.  We  may, 
therefore,  since  chapters  one  to  three  manifestly 
preceded  the  death  of  Jeroboam  (1.  4),  put 
Hosea's  date  at  about  B.  C.  743  to  733.    He  was 

93 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

thus  a  younger  contemporary  of  Amos.  Whether 
he  ever  saw  or  heard  the  Judean  prophet  we 
do  not  know.  There  are  two  verses  in  his  book 
(4.  15;  8.  14)  that  seem  to  imply  an  acquaint- 
ance with  the  prophecy  of  Amos,  but  their 
authenticity  is  open  to  question. 

Hosea's  home  was  in  the  northern  kingdom. 
This  is  clear  from  the  fact  that  he  speaks  of  the 
king  of  Israel  as  "our  king"  (7.  5),  and  from  the 
further  fact  that  all  the  places  he  mentions  by 
name  are  found  in  the  northern  realm,  as  for 
example  Gilead,  Gibeah,  Gilgal,  Jezreel,  Ramah, 
Shechem,  Bethel,  and  Samaria.  Another  rea- 
son often  adduced  in  support  of  this  view  is  that 
Hosea  is  more  sympathetic  in  his  attitude  toward 
Israel  than  Amos.  "In  every  sentence,"  says 
Ewald,  "it  appears  that  Hosea  had  not  only  vis- 
ited the  kingdom  of  Ephraim,  as  Amos  had 
done,  but  that  he  is  acquainted  with  it  from  the 
depths  of  his  heart,  and  follows  all  its  doings, 
aims,  and  fortunes  with  the  profound  feelings 
gendered  of  such  sympathy  as  is  conceivable  in 
the  case  of  a  native  prophet  only."  And  says 
Elmslie :  "The  words  of  Amos  sound  like  a  voice 
from  outside,  pealing  with  the  thunder  of  God's 
anger  and  righteous  indignation  against  wrongs 
and  injuries  that  Amos  does  not  feel  himself 
bound  up  with.  The  characteristic  of  Hosea's 
book   is   that   the  burden   of   Israel's   guilt   lies 

94 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

weighty  on  his  soul ;  he  wails,  and  mourns,  and 
laments,  and  repents  with  that  sinful  people." 

But  this  admitted  difference  between  the  two 
prophets  need  not  necessarily  be  due  to  the  fact 
that  one  was  a  native  of  Israel  and  the  other  not. 
It  may  be  due  quite  as  much  to  their  difference 
of  temperament.  Amos  was  a  stern  man,  a 
man  of  clear  thought  and  firm  will,  who  stood  to 
some  degree  apart  from  the  common  life  of  men. 
Hosea,  on  the  other  hand,  was  a  man  of  deeply 
emotional  nature,  rich  in  his  affections,  a  man 
who  by  instinct  entered  sympathetically  into  the 
lives  of  others.  Had  he,  like  Amos,  been  a  na- 
tive of  Judah,  his  message  would  in  all  probabil- 
ity have  been  the  same  in  spirit  that  it  now  is. 
For  no  such  gulf  separated  the  two  kingdoms  as 
is  sometimes  supposed.  Conditions  in  Judah 
were  not  essentially  different  from  those  in  Is- 
rael. The  things  that  united  the  two  realms  were 
far  deeper  and  more  significant  than  those  that 
divided  them.  There  is  no  indication  that  Amos 
felt  any  special  strangeness  when  at  Bethel,  or 
that  he  looked  upon  the  northern  kingdom  with 
any  particular  coldness.  The  two  peoples  were 
for  him  practically  one  (3.  1).  The  same  is  also 
true  of  Hosea,  who  refers  not  infrequently  to 
Judah  (5.  5,  10;  6.  4;  10.  11).  The  more  sym- 
pathetic tone  of  his  prophecies,  therefore,  can 
hardly  be  ascribed  to  his  place  of  residence.     It 

95 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

is  due,  rather,  to  his  temperament.  But  the 
other  grounds  above  mentioned  for  believing  that 
his  home  was  in  Israel  are  decisive.  And  it  is 
a  matter  of  interest  to  know  that  he  is  the  only 
canonical  prophet  of  whom  this  is  true.  Shortly 
after  his  time  Samaria  fell  (B.  C.  721).  He 
consequently  had  no  successors  in  Israel  such  as 
Amos  had  in  Judah. 

Concerning  the  details  of  Hosea's  life,  we 
have  very  little,  if  any,  information.  The  ques- 
tion has  been  raised  as  to  whether  his  home  was 
in  the  country  or  the  city,  and  it  has  been  argued 
that  the  numerous  illustrations  which  he  draws 
from  nature,  from  the  wild  beasts,  and  from  ag- 
ricultural life  favor  the  former.  It  has  also  been 
asserted  that  he  surely  lived  near  a  public  bakery, 
"for  he  delights  to  draw  illustrations  from  the 
fiery  oven."  But  these  are  idle  fancies,  as  worth- 
less as  they  are  baseless.  With  greater  probabil- 
ity it  has  been  conjectured  that  he  was  a  priest. 
He  has,  for  instance,  an  unusually  high  concep- 
tion of  the  duty  of  the  priesthood  in  the  matter 
of  popular  education.  He  looks  upon  the  priests 
as  in  a  large  measure  responsible  for  the  morals 
of  the  people.  It  is  "like  people,  like  priest" 
(4.  9).  "My  people,"  says  Jehovah,  "are  de- 
stroyed for  lack  of  knowledge";  and  then,  turn- 
ing to  the  priestly  class,  he  adds,  "Because  thou 
hast  rejected  knowledge,  I  will  also  reject  thee, 

96 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

that  thou  shalt  be  no  priest  to  me"  (4.  6).  The 
priests  instead  of  properly  instructing  the  people 
were  leading  them  astray.  "They  feed  on  the 
sin  of  my  people,  and  set  their  heart  on  their 
iniquity"  (4.  8).  But  not  only  does  Hosea  show 
unusual  insight  into  the  responsibility  of  the 
priesthood;  he  also  reveals  a  rich  knowledge  of 
the  past  history  of  his  people,  such  as  one  would 
naturally  expect  of  a  priest  (9.  10;  10.  9;  11.  1 ; 
12.  3 ;  13.  1).  Then,  too,  he  is  acquainted  with  a 
written  Law,  in  which  it  was  apparently  the  spe- 
cial function  of  the  priest  to  give  instruction 
(4.  6;  8.  1,  12).  Still  further,  it  may  be  noted 
that  he  speaks  of  "the  people  that  doth  not  un- 
derstand" (4.  14)  in  a  way  that  implies  that  he 
belonged  to  those  who  knew  the  requirements  of 
the  Law.  It  is  therefore  not  improbable  that  he 
belonged  to  the  priesthood,  and  was  forced  into 
the  prophetic  office  by  the  degeneracy  of  his 
order.  But  of  his  ministry  itself  we  know  noth- 
ing, except  that  he  seems  to  have  suffered  perse- 
cution (9.  7,  8). 

The  point  of  special  interest  in  connection  with 
the  life  of  Hosea  is  the  story  of  his  marriage 
(chapters  1  and  3).  So  strange  is  this  story  that 
it  is  still  an  open  question  whether  it  should  be 
interpreted  literally  or  allegorically.  In  favor  of 
the  former,  it  is  urged  that  if  Hosea  actually 
married  a  faithless  wife  and  then  later,  after  she 

97 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

had  been  put  away  because  of  her  infidelity,  re- 
stored her  to  his  home,  we  have  in  this  experi- 
ence the  key  to  his  message  of  the  divine  love. 
"Whence,"  it  is  asked,  "his  conception  of  the 
intense  and  passionate  love  of  Jehovah  for  his 
faithless  spouse,"  if  it  did  not  come  from  some 
such  experience  as  this?  But  such  reasoning  is 
precarious.  We  need  to  be  on  our  guard  against 
it.  It  often  misleads  people.  A  good  modern 
illustration  is  furnished  in  the  case  of  Ibsen. 
Shortly  after  his  marriage  he  wrote  a  drama 
entitled  Love's  Comedy,  in  which  he  took  a 
rather  pessimistic  view  of  wedded  life.  The 
work  at  once  called  forth  a  storm  of  protest, 
and  it  was  freely  asserted  that  the  views  there 
expressed  were  the  outcome  of  the  poet's  own 
domestic  infelicity.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  how- 
ever, this  conclusion  was  wholly  erroneous. 
Ibsen's  home  life  was  far  from  unhappy.  Ed- 
mund Gosse  says  that  Mrs.  Ibsen  must  be  re- 
garded as  one  of  the  few  successful  wives  of 
geniuses.  And  Ibsen  himself  said,  in  reply  to 
the  criticisms  passed  on  the  above  work,  that 
the  only  person  who  really  understood  the  book 
was  his  wife.  The  fact  is  that  men  of  genius 
do  not  need,  as  we  of  sluggish  fancies  do,  the 
stimulus  of  immediate  personal  experience  to 
direct  and  inspire  their  thought.  Endowed  with 
the  divine  gift  of  imagination,  they  can  project 
98 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

themselves  into  the  lives  of  others  and  think 
their  thoughts  without  necessarily  sharing  in 
their  experiences.  Reasoning  thus,  there  is 
nothing  in  Hosea's  conception  of  the  divine  love 
for  Israel  that  requires  that  he  should  have 
passed  through  such  a  tragic  experience  as  is 
recorded  in  his  book.  The  idea  may  well  have 
come  to  him  independently  of  any  such  expe- 
rience. 

This,  however,  does  not  settle  the  question  at 
issue.  The  story  of  Hosea's  marriage  may  still 
be  literal  history.  In  favor  of  this  view  it  is 
further  argued  that  there  are  certain  features  of 
the  narrative  that  do  not  admit  of  an  allegorical 
interpretation.  This  is  true  of  the  name  "Gamer 
the  daughter  of  Diblaim"  (i.  3),  and  also  of  the 
weaning  of  Lo-ruhamah  (1.  8).  Another  point 
made  is  that  the  analogy  furnished  by  Isaiah, 
who  gave  symbolical  names  to  his  two  sons 
(7-  3  5  8.  3 ) ,  tends  to  confirm  the  actuality  of 
what  is  here  recorded  of  Hosea.  But  over 
against  these  considerations,  it  is  contended  that 
all  the  details  of  an  allegory  need  not  have  sym- 
bolical significance.  Some  may  be  inserted  sim- 
ply to  fill  out  the  story.  And,  furthermore,  such 
a  name  as  that  of  Gomer,  the  daughter  of  Dib- 
laim, may  have  been  well  known  in  Hosea's  day. 
It  may,  as  Gressmann  suggests,  have  been  the 
name    of    some    semi-legendary    character    like 

99 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

Semiramis,  or  perhaps  that  of  some  notorious 
harlot  of  the  time;  in  which  case  the  symbolical 
character  of  the  narrative  would  have  been  clear 
at  once  to  the  reader.  It  is  further  urged  that 
the  command  to  take  "a  wife  of  whoredom  and 
children  of  whoredom"  (i.  2)  cannot  have  been 
literally  given  to  the  prophet,  and  that  the  re- 
newed command  in  chapter  3  to  love  an  adul- 
teress fits  in  poorly  with  chapter  1.  This,  it  is 
added,  would  not  be  the  case  if  the  narrative 
were  allegorical,  for  chapter  3  might  then  be 
regarded  as  an  independent  allegory  without  any 
connection  with  chapter  1.  Much  can  thus  be 
said  in  favor  of  a  purely  symbolical  interpreta- 
tion of  these  chapters.  (Compare  Jer.  13,  1-11 ; 
25.  I5ff. ).  But  decisive  objective  evidence 
either  way  cannot  be  found.  And  so  interpre- 
ters usually  fall  back  upon  their  own  taste. 
G.  A.  Smith,  for  instance,  says  that  "only  the 
real  pain  of  that  experience  could  have  made  the 
man  brave  enough  to  use  it  as  a  figure  of  his 
God's  treatment  of  Israel."  Others,  on  the  con- 
trary, like  Kuenen,  find  the  literal  interpretation 
"unnatural  and  offensive." 

The  one  distinct  advantage  of  regarding  the 
story  of  Hosea's  marriage  as  autobiographical 
is  that  it  gives  to  his  message  a  pathos  and  a 
realism  that  it  would  not  otherwise  have.  It 
puts  back  of  his  words  a  bleeding  heart,  and  this 
100 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

gives  to  them  a  new  power.  If,  however,  we 
accept  this  view,  which  is  the  one  commonly  held 
at  present,  we  must  interpret  the  words  "wife 
of  whoredom  and  children  of  whoredom"  (i.  2) 
as  proleptic.  It  is  inconceivable  that  Hosea 
should  have  deliberately  married  an  impure 
woman,  and  still  more  so  that  he  should  have 
done  it  under  divine  command.  He  must  have 
regarded  Gomer  as  pure  when  he  married  her. 
Only  later  did  he  learn  of  her  faithlessness.  The 
shock  of  this  discovery  probably  led  him  to  ban- 
ish her  from  his  home.  In  any  case  chapter  3 
finds  her  in  bondage  to  another  man,  from  whom 
Hosea  redeems  her.  This  tragic  experience,  if 
real,  must  have  caused  the  prophet  untold  suffer- 
ing. Still,  it  was  not  an  unmixed  evil.  It 
brought  him  a  great  spiritual  blessing.  Through 
it  he  came  to  know  the  heart  of  God  as  he  had 
not  known  it  before,  and  thus  was  admitted  to 
a  new  intimacy  and  richness  of  fellowship  with 
the  Divine.  As  he,  therefore,  from  the  stand- 
point of  this  later  experience,  looked  back  upon 
his  sufferings,  it  seemed  clear  to  him  that  the 
hand  of  God  had  been  in  them  all,  and  that  even 
his  marriage  with  this  impure  woman  had  been 
commanded  of  God.  He  did  not,  of  course, 
himself  realize  this  at  the  outset.  "On  that  un- 
certain voyage  he  had  sailed  with  sealed  orders." 
Indeed,  he  did  not  even  know  that  he  was  obey- 
101 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

ing  orders.  But  as  he  looks  back  upon  his  life 
from  a  later  date,  it  is  all  clear  to  him.  All 
things,  he  now  sees,  have  been  working  together 
for  his  good,  and  in  them  all  he  has  been  fol- 
lowing the  leading  of  Jehovah.  Thus  he  found 
for  himself  the  greatest  comfort  that  can  come 
to  any  man  in  the  face  of  sorrow  and  disappoint- 
ment. Had  he  been  an  unbeliever,  he  would 
have  seen  in  his  unfortunate  marriage  simply  a 
case  of  bad  luck  without  any  redeeming  feature 
whatsoever.  But  being  a  man  of  faith,  he  saw 
in  it  the  gift  of  God  and  the  call  of  God. 

By  this,  however,  I  do  not  mean  that  it  was 
Hosea's  unfortunate  marriage  that  led  him  to  be- 
come a  prophet.  Not  a  few  scholars  take  this 
view.  Dr.  Batten,  for  instance,  says,  "Amos 
was  led  to  prophesy  by  reason  of  divinely  given 
insight ;  Hosea  was  directed  to  the  same  task  by 
domestic  affliction  of  the  sorest  kind  which  can 
come  to  an  upright  soul."  But  this  view  has  no 
basis  in  the  text  (compare  I.  2),  and  is,  more- 
over, out  of  harmony  with  the  common  interpre- 
tation of  Hosea's  experiences.  When  his  first 
child  was  born  he  was  not  aware  of  his  wife's 
infidelity.  Yet  the  name  Jezreel,  given  this  child, 
was  a  prophecy,  announcing  the  fall  of  the 
northern  kingdom.  It  is  also  by  no  means  cer- 
tain that  the  prophet  had  come  to  know  his 
wife's  true  character  at  the  time  of  the  birth  of 
102 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

the  next  two  children,  whose  names  also  were 
prophetic  of  Israel's  doom.  Indeed,  the  con- 
trary is  far  more  probable.  For  he  could  hardly 
have  retained  his  wife  in  his  home  after  he  had 
learned  of  her  unfaithfulness.  W.  Robertson 
Smith,  it  is  true,  says  that  Hosea  knew  that  the 
children  were  not  his  own,  but  "concealed  the 
shame  of  their  mother  and  acknowledged  the 
children  as  his  own,  hiding  the  bitter  sorrow  in 
his  own  heart."  To  this,  however,  A.  B.  David- 
son has  made  the  following  effective  reply:  "If 
he  concealed  the  shame  at  the  time,  he  certainly 
took  effectual  pains  to  proclaim  it  to  all  the 
world  soon  afterward."  It  is  then  clear  that 
Hosea's  call  to  the  prophetic  office  preceded  his 
tragic  domestic  experience.  What  the  latter  did 
was  simply  to  give  a  new  content  and  a  new 
urgency  to  the  call.  It  led  him  to  understand 
more  fully  than  before  the  passionate  love  of 
Jehovah,  and  moved  him  to  devote  himself  with 
new  energy  to  his  prophetic  task.  Harriet 
Beecher  Stowe,  in  speaking  of  the  sorrow  that 
came  to  her  in  the  death  of  one  of  her  children, 
once  said,  "I  felt  that  I  could  never  be  consoled 
for  it,  unless  this  crushing  of  my  own  heart 
might  enable  me  to  work  out  some  great  good 
to  others."  And  so  it  seems  to  have  been  with 
Hosea.  His  grief  and  shame  impelled  him  to 
seek  consolation  in  the  more  effective  service 
103 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

which  he  was  now  qualified  to  render  to  his  own 
people. 

The  book  of  Hosea,  as  we  have  already  ob- 
served, consists  of  two  parts — chapters  I  to  3 
and  4  to  14.  The  first  may  be  regarded  as  in 
the  nature  of  an  introduction  to  the  second.  In 
it  the  prophet  states  his  standpoint,  gives  us  the 
key  to  his  message  as  a  whole.  The  key  is  this : 
Jehovah's  relation  to  Israel  is  that  of  a  husband. 
Israel,  however,  has  gone  astray,  has  proven  her- 
self a  faithless  wife.  Jehovah,  therefore,  as  a 
righteous  husband,  feels  compelled  to  put  her 
away.  But  so  deep  and  genuine  is  his  affection 
that  he  cannot  allow  her  to  be  permanently  alien- 
ated from  him.  So  he  redeems  her  from  her 
bondage,  and  awaits  the  time  when  she  will  be 
worthy  of  full  restoration  to  his  favor.  In  this 
general  conception  of  Jehovah's  relation  to 
Israel  we  have  the  essence  of  the  prophet's  mes- 
sage. His  whole  interpretation  of  Israel's 
history  centers  about  the  idea  of  the  divine  love. 
In  expressing  this  idea  he  might  have  used 
another  figure.  He  might  have  represented  Je- 
hovah as  the  father  rather  than  the  husband  of 
Israel.  Indeed,  he  does  so  later  (11.  1).  And 
this  is  the  figure  which  will  naturally  be  used 
as  soon  as  individualism  has  displaced  national- 
ism. But  so  long  as  the  nation  rather  than  the 
104 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

individual  is  the  center  of  interest  the  figure  of 
Jehovah  as  a  husband  is  the  more  natural  one. 
The  important  thing,  however,  is  the  idea,  not 
the  figure.  And  the  idea  of  the  divine  love  is  in 
these  opening  chapters  of  the  book  not  only- 
suggested,  it  is  made  the  basal  element  in  the 
prophet's  message,  the  Alpha  and  Omega  of  his 
theology. 

In  expounding  the  conception  of  the  divine 
love,  Hosea  relates  the  story  of  his  marriage 
which  we  have  just  considered  at  some  length. 
One  difficulty  with  the  literal  interpretation  of 
this  story  is  the  fragmentary  form  in  which  it 
appears.  Not  only  is  it  broken  up  into  two  de- 
tached parts  (chapters  I  and  3),  but  the  connec- 
tion between  the  parts  is  missing.  How  the  wife 
came  into  the  position  in  which  we  find  her  in 
chapter  3  is  not  stated.  Hence  it  is  supposed  by 
some  scholars  that  the  account  of  how  she  was 
expelled  from  her  home  has  fallen  out  of  the 
text.  This  account  was  originally  the  connect- 
ing link  between  1.  1-9  and  chapter  3.  The 
application,  then,  of  the  prophet's  private  expe- 
riences to  Israel,  which  we  now  find  in  1.  10  to  2. 
23,  belonged  originally  after  chapter  3.  This 
is  at  least  its  logical  position,  for  the  contents 
of  chapter  3  are  presupposed  in  chapter  2. 
G.  A.  Smith,  however,  thinks  the  present  ar- 
rangement significant.  It  "means,"  he  says, 
105 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

"that  while  the  prophet's  private  pain  preceded 
his  sympathy  with  God's  pain,  it  was  not  he  who 
set  God  but  God  who  set  him  the  example  of 
forgiveness."  But,  ingenious  and  beautiful  as 
is  this  suggestion,  it  is  hardly  an  adequate  expla- 
nation of  the  present  arrangement  of  the  text. 
Indeed,  the  difficulties  connected  with  the  story 
as  it  now  stands  are  so  numerous  and  serious  that 
some  recent  critics  have  either  eliminated  it 
altogether  or  have  so  curtailed  and  modified  it 
as  to  deprive  it  of  any  special  signification.  It  is 
not  then  surprising  that  the  allegorical  interpre- 
tation is  again  beginning  to  commend  itself  to 
scholars. 

The  second  and  main  part  of  the  book,  chap- 
ters 4  to  14,  is  made  up  of  a  number  of  inde- 
pendent discourses,  but  there  is  no  sharp  line 
of  demarcation  between  them.  One  runs  into 
the  other  in  such  a  way  that  every  analysis  of 
the  text  is  necessarily  more  or  less  arbitrary. 
It  is,  however,  noticeable  that  from  4.  1  to  7.  7 
the  prophet  deals  chiefly  with  the  mor?1  and 
religious  corruption  of  Israel,  while  from  7.  8 
to  9.  9  he  devotes  attention  more  especially  to 
her  political  weakness.  Then  in  9.  10  to  13.  16, 
while  the  lines  of  thought  in  the  two  preceding 
sections  are  continued,  we  have  a  number  of 
references  to  the  past  history  of  Israel  that  give 
to  this  part  of  the  book  a  more  or  less  distinctive 
106 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

character.    And,  finally,  in  chapter  14  we  have  a 
closing  word  of  hope. 

In  reading  these  chapters  we  are  first  im- 
pressed with  the  prominence  of  the  prophet's 
message  of  doom.  To  some  degree  we  had  been 
prepared  for  this  by  chapter  1.  But  chapters  2 
and  3  had  hardly  led  us  to  believe  that  it  would 
be  so  conspicuous  as  it  is.  Chapters  4  to  13  are 
almost  one  continuous  denunciation  of  Israel  for 
her  sins.  Her  impending  destruction  is  an- 
nounced again  and  again.  Amos  does  not  deal 
more  unsparingly  with  Israel's  sins  than  does 
Hosea,  nor  does  he  announce  her  approaching 
doom  more  confidently  and  more  unrelentingly. 
If  anything,  Hosea  is  the  more  bitter,  the  fiercer 
of  the  two.  He  represents  Jehovah  as  saying 
that  he  "hated"  the  people  of  Israel.  "Because 
of  the  wickedness  of  their  doings  I  will  drive 
them  out  of  my  house ;  I  will  love  them  no  more" 
(9.  15).  "I  will  be  unto  Ephraim  as  a  lion,  and 
as  a  young  lion  to  the  house  of  Judah :  I,  even  I, 
will  tear  and  go  away ;  I  will  carry  off,  and  there 
shall  be  none  to  deliver"  (5.  14).  "Shall  I  ran- 
som them  from  the  power  of  Sheol?  Shall  I 
redeem  them  from  death?  O  death,  where  are 
thy  plagues?  O  Sheol,  where  is  thy  destruc- 
tion?    Repentance  shall  be  hid  from  my  eyes" 

(13-  14). 
The  doom  thus  threatened  is  variously  con- 

107 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

ceived  by  Hosea.  In  some  passages  it  is  repre- 
sented as  the  outcome  of  internal  decay.  "I  am," 
says  Jehovah,  "unto  Ephraim  as  a  moth,  and 
to  the  house  of  Judah  as  rottenness"  (5.  12; 
compare  7.  9;  9.  16).  In  others  it  is  thought 
of  as  brought  on  by  war  (5.  8f. ;  7.  16;  11.  6). 
The  people  are  to  go  into  captivity,  but  whether 
to  Egypt  or  Assyria  the  prophet  apparently  did 
not  know.  He  mentions  both  lands  as  places  to 
which  they  are  to  be  deported  (8.  13;  9.  3,  6; 
11.  5),  and  also  says  that  they  are  to  be  "wan- 
derers among  the  nations"  (9.  17).  This  idea 
of  banishment  from  their  native  land  is  promi- 
nent in  the  book,  and  is  the  prevailing  form  un- 
der which  the  impending  doom  is  conceived. 
But  the  doom  itself  was  larger  than  any  particu- 
lar calamity.  It  was  a  kind  of  world-judgment 
(4.  3).  This  eschatological  conception  lay  back 
of  Hosea's  as  well  as  Amos's  teaching.  Only 
as  we  bear  this  in  mind  can  we  fully  appreciate 
their  message  of  doom.  The  destruction  of  Is- 
rael, from  their  point  of  view,  was  not  merely  a 
matter  of  political  or  national  importance.  It 
was  an  event  charged  with  the  profoundest  re- 
ligious significance.  The  whole  question  of  final 
doom  and  salvation  was  involved  in  it.  It  meant 
as  much  to  the  ancient  Israelite  as  individual  des- 
tiny means  to  us  to-day. 

Another  point  to  be  borne  in  mind  in  estimat- 
108 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

ing  the  prophetic  message  of  doom  is  this :  the 
sense  of  danger  is  intimately  and  profoundly 
related  to  the  awakening  of  the  religious  con- 
sciousness. The  particular  form  under  which 
the  chief  danger  of  life  presents  itself  to  the 
human  mind  naturally  varies  from  age  to  age. 
But  the  feeling  that  there  is  in  life  something 
supremely  important  at  stake  underlies  all  pro- 
found and  intense  religious  conviction.  And  the 
more  vividly  the  real  danger  of  life  is  conceived, 
and  the  more  imminent  it  is  thought  to  be,  the 
more  immediate  and  the  more  genuine  will  be 
the  religious  response.  A  religion  which  makes 
no  appeal  to  the  sense  of  danger  has  no  edge  to 
it.  It  has  no  power  to  grip  the  basal  impulses 
of  life.  It  is  simply  a  meaningless  sentiment,  a 
worthless  survival  of  some  vital  religious  move- 
ment of  the  past.  In  then  laying  such  tremen- 
dous stress  on  the  impending  doom  of  Israel, 
Hosea  and  the  other  prophets  of  his  day  were 
not  simply  adapting  themselves  to  the  actual  his- 
torical conditions  of  their  own  time;  they  were 
appealing  to  a  permanent  element  in  human  na- 
ture, an  element  that  underlies  the  vital  and 
vigorous  religious  life  of  every  age. 

The  grounds  on  which  Hosea  bases  his  mes- 
sage of  doom  differ  somewhat  from  those  found 
in  the  book  of  Amos.     Amos  lays  special  stress 
on  the  social  injustice  of  his  day,  devoting  but 
109 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

little  attention  to  the  corrupt  worship  and  other 
evils.  Hosea,  on  the  other  hand,  makes  the  re- 
ligious corruption  of  his  time,  including  the  idol- 
atry, particularly  prominent,  laying  less  stress  on 
the  distinctively  ethical  side  of  the  people's  life. 
Then,  in  addition,  he  denounces,  as  Amos  does 
not,  the  foreign  alliances  and  the  monarchy  it- 
self. His  teaching  at  this  point  is  therefore  more 
complex  than  that  of  Amos.  In  order  to  under- 
stand it  better  it  will  be  well  to  consider  its 
different  elements  separately. 

Hosea  refers  occasionally  to  the  oppression  of 
the  poor.  He  denounces  those  that  "remove  the 
landmark"  (5.  10),  and  those  also  who  oppress 
by  means  of  "balances  of  deceit"  (12.  7).  Of 
Ephraim,  who  boasts  that  he  has  become  rich, 
he  says,  "All  his  gains  will  not  suffice  for  the 
iniquity  which  he  has  committed"  (12.  8; 
emended  reading).  But  this  special  evil  is  not 
prominent  in  his  prophecies.  What  we  find  in 
them  is  a  general  relaxing  of  the  moral  bonds. 
Robbery  and  murder  seem  to  have  been  common 
(4.  2;  6.  9;  7.  1).  Fornication  was  also  rife. 
The  prophet  refers  to  it  again  and  again,  and 
makes  some  significant  observations  concerning 
it  (4.  2,  10,  11-14;  6.  10;  7.  4;  9.  10).  "I  am 
unaware,"  says  G.  A.  Smith,  "of  any  earlier 
moralist  in  any  literature  who  traced  the  effects 
of  national  licentiousness  in  a  diminishing  popu- 
110 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

lation,  or  who  exposed  the  persistent  delusion  of 
libertine  men  that  they  themselves  may  resort 
to  vice  and  yet  keep  their  womankind  chaste. 
Hosea,  so  far  as  we  know,  was  the  first  to  do 
this."  (See  Hos.  9.  11,  16;  4.  14).  There  was 
then  a  general  corruption  of  society.  All  classes 
were  involved  in  it.  The  priests  and  nobles,  it 
is  true,  are  singled  out  for  special  castigation, 
but  they  are  condemned  not  so  much  because 
they  have  wronged  the  poor  as  because  they  have 
led  the  people  astray.  The  whole  nation  was 
guilty.  "There  is,"  says  the  prophet,  "no  truth, 
nor  goodness,  nor  knowledge  of  God  in  the  land. 
There  is  nought  but  swearing  and  breaking  of 
faith,  and  killing,  and  stealing,  and  committing 
adultery"  (4.  1,  2). 

The  evil,  however,  which  Hosea  condemns 
most  persistently  and  most  severely  is  the  cor- 
rupt worship.  This  lay  at  the  root  of  much  of 
the  moral  corruption.  The  current  licentious- 
ness, for  instance,  was  in  large  part  to  be  traced 
to  the  sanctuaries.  The  altars  on  the  high  hills 
were  breeding  places  of  iniquity  (4.  13).  At 
them  prostitution  was  regularly  practiced.  No 
wonder  that  Hosea  so  severely  denounced  the 
cult  of  his  day!  But  it  was  not  only  because 
of  its  immoral  accompaniments  that  Hosea  con- 
demned it.  It  was  in  and  of  itself  a  wrong  way 
of  seeking  God.  "I  desire,"  says  Jehovah, 
in 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

"goodness,  and  not  sacrifice;  and  the  knowledge 
of  God,  not  burnt  offerings"  (6.  6).  "They 
shall  go  with  their  flocks  and  with  their  herds  to 
seek  Jehovah;  but  they  shall  not  find  him;  he 
hath  withdrawn  himself  from  them"  (5.  6;  com- 
pare 8.  1  if.).  The  one  way  to  find  God  is 
through  the  right  attitude  of  mind,  through 
faithfulness  and  goodness.  This  was  also,  as 
we  have  seen,  the  teaching  of  Amos.  Both 
prophets  looked  upon  the  current  ceremonialism 
jis  religiously  worthless,  and  even  harmful. 

But  Hosea  went  beyond  Amos  and  declared 
that  the  Israelitic  worship  of  his  day  was  nothing 
short  of  a  worship  of  Baal.  The  people  them- 
selves, to  be  sure,  thought  they  were  worship- 
ing Jehovah  (5.  6;  8.  13;  9.  4),  but  they  did  not 
"know"  him  (5.  4).  Both  in  spirit  and  content 
their  worship  was  largely  an  importation  from 
the  Canaanites.  This  was  true  of  the  immoral- 
ity associated  with  it.  So  prominent  a  feature 
of  the  Canaanitic  religion  was  prostitution,  that 
the  prophets  came  to  speak  of  all  idolatry  as  a 
going  "whoring"  after  other  gods.  It  was  also 
true  of  the  use  of  images.  They  had  no  place 
in  the  original  Mosaic  institution.  But  grad- 
ually through  Canaanitic  influence  they  were  in- 
troduced into  Israel.  On  the  part  of  the  more 
spiritual  element  in  the  nation  there  was  always 
a  feeling  of  aversion  toward  them,  but  this  feel- 
112 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

ing  did  not  apparently  come  to  a  head  until  the 
time  of  Hosea.  He,  so  far  as  we  know,  was 
the  first  publicly  to  attack  and  ridicule  their  use. 
The  golden  idol  set  up  by  Jeroboam  I  he  calls 
"calves"  (10.  5;  8.  5,  6).  And  with  utmost 
scorn  he  refers  to  men,  that  sacrifice,  kissing 
calves  (13.  2).  All  images,  he  says,  are  man- 
made  (8.  4;  14.  3).  They  are,  therefore,  ut- 
terly unworthy  to  represent  Jehovah.  Indeed, 
they  did  not  represent  him.  They  were  simply 
Baals,  false  gods  (11.  2).  This  aspect  of 
Hosea's  teaching,  which  was  continued  by 
Isaiah  and  reached  its  height  in  Deutero-Isaiah, 
formed  a  very  important  factor  in  the  develop- 
ment of  Old  Testament  religion. 

But  not  only  were  there  certain  features  or 
accompaniments  of  the  current  cult  which  had 
been  introduced  from  without;  the  whole  spirit 
of  Israelitic  worship  had  become  heathenish. 
The  people  had  forgotten  the  true  ethical 
character  of  Jehovah.  They  would  howl  to  him 
on  their  beds,  but  with  their  hearts  they  did  not 
cry  unto  him  (7.  14).  They  would  gather  them- 
selves for  grain  and  new  wine,  but  in  their  spirit 
would  rebel  against  him.  Hosea,  therefore,  sees 
in  the  cult  of  his  day  simply  a  worship  of  Baal. 
Israel  has  played  the  harlot.  She  has  said,  "I 
will  go  after  my  lovers,  that  give  me  my  bread 
and  my  water,  my  wool  and  my  flax,  mine  oil 
"3 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

and  my  drink"  (2.  5).  Of  her  vines  and  her 
fig  trees  also  she  has  said,  "These  are  my  hire 
that  my  lovers  have  given  me"  (2.  12).  The 
soil,  the  fruitful  soil,  as  Wellhausen  says,  was 
the  object  of  her  religion;  it  took  the  place  alike 
of  heaven  and  hell.  No  wonder,  then,  that  Je- 
hovah declares  to  her  that  he  will  deprive  her  of 
all  the  fruits  of  the  soil,  and  will  hedge  up  her 
way  until  eventually  she  is  forced  to  say,  "I  will 
go  and  return  to  my  first  husband ;  for  then  was 
it  better  with  me  than  now"  (2.  7.).  This 
language  at  first  sounds  strange  to  us  (compare 
2.  2-13).  But  the  underlying  thought  is  per- 
fectly familiar.  What  we  have  here  is  simply 
the  age-old  conflict  between  the  sensuous  and  the 
spiritual.  The  current  Baalish  cult  was  a  pure 
nature-religion.  It  was  sensuous  and  sensual. 
The  religion  of  Jehovah,  on  the  other  hand,  was 
sternly  ethical.  And  in  the  long  run,  says  the 
prophet,  this  higher  form  of  religion  is  certain 
to  prevail.  The  hard  experiences  of  life,  its 
losses  and  disappointments,  the  ultimately  un- 
satisfying character  of  the  sense-life,  the  grim 
fact  of  death — all  of  these  are  on  its  side.  They 
are  continually  summoning  us  to  the  higher  life 
of  the  Spirit.  In  view  of  these  things,  it  would 
seem  that  eventually  Israel  and  all  men  would 
surely  turned  from  Baal  to  Jehovah,  from  a  god 
of  the  flesh  to  the  God  of  character. 
114 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

From  what  has  been  said  concerning  the  Is- 
raelitic  cult  of  his  time,  it  is  evident  why  Hosea 
so  completely  repudiated  it.  But  it  is  not  quite 
so  clear  why  he  denounced  all  foreign  alli- 
ances. With  us  such  alliances  would  be  simply 
matters  of  political  prudence.  This,  however, 
was  not  the  standpoint  from  which  Hosea 
viewed  them.  He  regarded,  it  is  true,  the  policy 
of  Israel's  leaders  as  foolish.  "Ephraim,"  he 
says,  "is  like  a  silly  dove,  without  understand- 
ing: they  call  unto  Egypt,  they  go  to  Assyria" 
(7.  11).  In  spite  of  the  gifts  which  they  bear 
with  them,  they  will  by  their  diplomatic  efforts 
secure  no  real  aid  (10.  6;  12.  1).  The  great 
Assyrian  king,  he  says,  "is  not  able  to  heal  you ; 
neither  will  he  cure  you  of  your  wound" 
(5.  13).  Instead  of  this,  they  will  themselves 
be  carried  into  captivity  by  the  very  powers 
whose  help  they  seek  (8.  13;  9.  3;  11.  5).  Nev- 
ertheless, it  was  not  because  these  alliances  were 
unwise  from  the  political  point  of  view  that 
Hosea  condemned  them.  The  reason  for  his 
opposition  to  them  was  deeper  than  this.  He 
saw  in  them  an  evidence  of  disloyalty  to  Jeho- 
vah (7.  15).  But  exactly  in  what  this  disloy- 
alty consisted  is  not  perfectly  clear.  Some  find 
it  in  the  fact  that  in  ancient  times  every  treaty 
with  another  nation  involved  to  a  certain  extent 
a  recognition  of  the  god  or  gods  of  that  nation. 
115 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

Hence  such  a  treaty  on  Israel's  part  was  incon- 
sistent with  the  sole  Godhead  of  Jehovah  and 
implied  a  measure  of  distrust  in  him.  Others 
explain  it  on  the  ground  that  the  alliance  of  a 
small  kingdom  like  Israel  with  a  great  empire 
like  Assyria  or  Egypt  would  necessarily  mean 
the  introduction  into  Israel  of  Assyrian  or 
Egyptian  customs,  rites,  and  beliefs  that  were 
out  of  harmony  with  the  law  of  Jehovah.  But 
neither  of  these  explanations  is  adequate,  as 
may  be  seen  from  the  fact  that  when  Israel  or 
Judah  had  once  entered  into  an  alliance  with 
another  nation,  the  prophets  advocated  fidelity 
to  it.  Some  other  factor  must  have  entered  into 
their  attitude  toward  foreign  alliances.  And  this 
is  to  be  found  in  their  conception  of  Israel's 
unique  mission  in  the  world.  This  mission  was 
religious,  not  political.  Hosea's  "ideal,"  as 
Davidson  says,  "was  already  that  of  the  Church 
of  God."  Political  intriguing  was  therefore 
out  of  harmony  with  Israel's  true  mission.  It 
tended  to  secularize  the  people,  to  make  of  them 
a  nation  like  the  other  nations  of  the  world,  and 
so  was  equivalent  to  hiring  lovers  and  speaking 
lies  against  Jehovah  (8.  9;  7.  13). 

It  is  from  this  point  of  view,  also,  that  we  are 
to   understand    Hosea's   antipathy   to  the  mon- 
archy.   The  kings  of  his  day  were  weak.     They 
had  no  power  to  hold  firmly  and  securely  the 
116 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

reins  of  government.  They  were  tossed  hither 
and  thither  like  chips  upon  the  water  (10.  7). 
"Where  now  is  thy  king,"  asks  the  prophet, 
"that  he  may  save  thee?"  (13.  10.)  And  the 
people  in  their  helplessness  cry  out,  "The  king, 
what  can  he  do  for  us?"  (10.  3).  But  weak  and 
worthless  as  these  kings  were,  it  was  not  merely 
on  this  account  that  Hosea  condemned  them. 
His  antipathy  had  a  deeper  basis.  They  and 
their  predecessors  had  represented  a  policy  hos- 
tile to  that  of  the  prophets.  They  had  encour- 
aged idolatry  (1  Kings  12.  28).  They  had 
been  the  leaders  in  foreign  alliances  (2  Kings 
15.  19).  They  had  many  of  them  ascended  the 
throne  through  violence  and  murder.  By  their 
example  and  influence  they  had  thus  done  all  in 
their  power  to  thwart  the  very  purpose  of  Je- 
hovah in  the  choice  of  Israel.  No  wonder  that 
the  prophet  felt  himself  arrayed  in  spirit  against 
them,  no  wonder  that  he  classes  them  along  with 
the  idols  as  false  rivals  of  Jehovah,  and  no 
wonder  that  Jehovah  himself  says,  "They  have 
set  up  kings  but  not  by  me;  they  have  made 
princes,  and  I  knew  it  not"  (8.  3).  "I  give  thee 
a  king  in  mine  anger  and  take  him  away  in  my 
wrath"  (13.  11).  Kings  and  people  alike  had 
sown  to  the  wind  and  so  were  now  about  to  reap 
the  whirlwind  (8.  7). 

In  this  indictment  of  Israel  it  is  to  be  ob- 
117 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

served  that  Hosea  does  not  treat  the  different 
evils  here  spoken  of  as  though  they  were  inde- 
pendent of  each  other.  They  are  all  of  one 
piece,  all  exhibitions  of  one  cardinal  sin,  and 
that  sin  is  apostasy  from  Jehovah.  The  im- 
morality, the  idolatry,  the  foreign  alliances,  the 
man-made  kings — all  these  were  instances  of 
disloyalty  on  Israel's  part  to  the  God  of  her 
fathers.  At  the  outset  she  had  been  true  to  him 
(2.  14L ;  9.  10).  She  had  responded  with  ardor 
to  his  affection.  But  soon  thereafter  she  turned 
away  from  him.  Like  Adam  she  transgressed 
the  covenant  (6.  7).  And  since  then  her  his- 
tory has  been  one  long  illustration  of  infidelity 
to  him.  She  has  dealt  treacherously  and  re- 
belled against  him  (5.  7;  13.  16).  What  she 
needs,  therefore,  above  everything  else  is  to  re- 
turn to  him.  She  needs  to  learn  righteousness 
and  kindness  and  the  knowledge  of  God  (4.  1 ; 
6.  6;  10.  12;  12.  6).  This  is  her  supreme 
duty,  and  this  also  is  the  panacea  for  all  her  ills. 
But  so  addicted  have  her  children  become  to 
evil,  that  "their  doings  will  not  suffer  them  to 
turn  unto  their  God"  (5.  4).  In  some  moment 
of  affliction  they  may,  to  be  sure,  say  to  one 
another,  "Come,  and  let  us  return  unto  Jeho- 
vah; for  he  hath  torn,  and  he  will  heal  us;  he 
hath  smitten  and  he  will  bind  us  up"  (6.  1). 
But  this  is  not  seriously  meant.  It  is  merely  a 
118 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

passing  mood.  And  so  Jehovah  says  unto  them : 
"O  Ephraim,  what  shall  I  do  unto  thee?  O  Ju- 
dah,  what  shall  I  do  unto  thee?  for  your  good- 
ness is  as  a  morning  cloud,  and  as  the  dew  that 
goeth  early  away''  (6.  4).  What  they  need  is 
a  radical  change  of  character.  They  must  break 
up  their  fallow  ground  (10.  12).  A  new  birth, 
indeed,  is  needed,  but  the  moral  energy  neces- 
sary to  bring  this  about  is  lacking  (13.  13). 
And  so  "the  years  that  might  have  been  the  na- 
tion's birth  are  by  their  own  folly  to  prove  their 
death." 

But  unfaithful  as  Israel  had  been,  and  cer- 
tain as  was  her  doom,  this  fact  did  not  obscure 
the  divine  love.  In  a  passion  of  indignation  at 
her  infidelity,  Jehovah  might  say  that  he  would 
love  her  no  mpre  (9.  15).  But  this  did  not 
represent  his  settled  state  of  mind.  "Jehovah," 
we  read  elsewhere,  "loveth  the  children  of  Is- 
rael, though  they  turn  unto  other  gods"  (3.  1). 
His  love  is  constant.  It  is  not  canceled  by  hu- 
man sin.  This  is  the  great  teaching  of  Hosea. 
This  is  the  gospel  that  he  brought  into  the 
world.  Various  figures  are  used  to  express  the 
intimacy  and  tenderness  of  Jehovah's  relation 
to  Israel.  He  is  the  husband,  Israel  is  the  wife. 
This  figure,  as  we  have  seen,  forms  the  sub- 
stance of  chapters  1  to  3.  But  it  is  also  implied 
119 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

in  the  rest  of  the  book.  Israel,  for  instance,  is 
represented  as  dwelling  in  Jehovah's  house 
(8.  i;  9.  15).  Her  wickedness  or  disobedience 
is  regularly  spoken  of  as  harlotry  (4.  11  ;  1.  2; 
5.  3,  4;  6.  9).  And  her  moral  and  material 
improvement  is  expressed  by  the  idea  of  a  re- 
turn on  her  own  part  (5.  4;  6.  1;  7.  10,  16; 
12.  6),  and  that  of  a  redemption  on  the  part 
of  Jehovah  (7.  13;  13.  14).  These  expressions 
are  evidently  allusions  to  the  story  of  chapters 
1  to  3.  Another  figure  used  to  express  Jeho- 
vah's relation  to  Israel  is  that  of  a  physician 
(6.  1;  7.  1;  14.  5;  compare  5.  13).  He  is  also 
said  to  be  their  only  "saviour"  (13.  4).  But 
more  impressive  than  these  figures  is  that  of  Je- 
hovah as  Father  to  Israel :  "When  Israel  was  a 
child,"  says  Jehovah,  "then  I  loved  him,  and 
called  him  out  of  Egypt.  ...  I  taught  Ephraim 
to  walk;  I  took  them  on  my  arms,  ...  I  drew 
them  with  cords  of  a  man,  with  bands  of  love" 
(11.  1-4).  In  view  of  this  tender  relationship, 
it  is  not  strange  that  after  a  severe  denunciation 
of  Israel  Jehovah  cries  out, 

"How  shall  I  give  thee  up,  Ephraim? 
How  shall  I  cast  thee  off,  Israel? 
How  shall  I  make  thee  as  Admah? 
How  shall  I  set  thee  as  Zeboim? 
My  heart  is  turned  within  me, 
My  compassions  are  kindled  together"  (11.  8). 
120 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

This,  as  G.  A.  Smith  says,  is  the  "greatest  pas- 
sage in  Hosea — deepest  if  not  highest  of  his 
book." 

From  it  we  pass  naturally  to  a  consideration 
of  Hosea's  message  of  hope.  This  message  is 
not  confined,  as  in  Amos,  to  the  last  chapter 
(14.  1-8),  but  appears  in  other  parts  of  the  book 
as  well  (1.  10  to  2.  1;  2.  14-23;  3.  1-5;  11.  10, 
11).  Hosea  seems  to  have  used,  as  Amos  did 
not,  the  hope  of  a  better  future  to  lure  the  people 
on  to  obedience  to  Jehovah.  It  is  interesting  to 
observe  how  he  represents  the  better  future  as  in 
almost  every  regard  the  golden  counterpart  of 
the  present.  The  marriage  bond  between  Israel 
and  Jehovah  is  now  broken,  but  in  the  better 
future  there  is  to  be  a  new  betrothal.  "I  will 
betroth  thee  unto  me,"  says  Jehovah,  "forever; 
yea,  I  will  betroth  thee  unto  me  in  righteous- 
ness, and  in  justice,  and  in  lovingkindness,  and 
in  mercies"  (2.  19).  And  Israel  in  that  day  will 
make  answer  "as  in  the  days  of  her  youth,  and 
as  in  the  day  when  she  came  up  out  of  the  land 
of  Egypt"  (2.  15).  At  present,  the  Israelites 
bear  names  that  speak  of  doom  and  rejection, 
but  in  the  better  future  these  names  are  either 
to  be  changed  or  to  be  given  a  new  significance. 
Jezreel,  instead  of  pointing  to  the  battlefield 
where  Israel  is  to  be  overthrown  (1.  4,  5),  will 
designate  the  place  where  the  children  of  Judah 
121 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

and  the  children  of  Israel  shall  gather  together 
under  one  head  and  go  up  from  the  whole  land, 
"for  great  shall  be  the  day  of  Jezreel"  (i.  n). 
The  name  "Jezreel,"  as  applied  to  Israel,  will 
then  also  be  true  to  its  etymology.  It  means 
"God  sows,"  and  so,  after  the  exile,  Israel  will 
be  sown  again  in  her  own  land  by  Jehovah 
(2.  23).  At  present,  the  children  of  Israel  also 
bear  the  names  of  Lo-ruhamah  ("Unpitied") 
and  Lo-ammi  ("Not  my  people"),  but  these 
names  are  hereafter  to  lose  their  negatives,  and 
to  signify  that  the  Israelites  have  again  become 
the  people  of  Jehovah  and  the  object  of  his 
mercy,  "the  sons  of  the  living  God"  (2.  23; 
2.  1;  1.  10).  The  covenant  likewise  between 
Jehovah  and  Israel,  which  is  now  broken,  will 
then  be  renewed,  and  extended  so  as  to  include 
the  beasts  of  the  field  and  the  birds  of  the  heav- 
ens (2.  18). 

The  prophecies  of  hope  in  Hosea  thus  dovetail 
into  the  rest  of  the  book.  Their  language  and 
style  are  also  thoroughly  Hoseanic.  Neverthe- 
less, not  a  few  critics  reject  them  all  as  later 
additions,  on  the  ground  chiefly  that  they  are 
inconsistent  with  the  prophet's  message  of  doom. 
Jehovah,  for  instance,  declares  in  9.  15  that  he 
will  drive  Israel  from  his  home,  and  that  he 
will  love  them  no  more.  In  14.  4  on  the  other 
hand,  he  says,  "I  will  heal  their  backsliding,  I 
122 


HOSEA  THE  PROPHET  OF  LOVE 

will  love  them  freely."  Between  these  two  ut- 
terances there  is,  it  is  claimed,  a  complete  con- 
tradiction. And  formally  this  is  true.  But 
those  who  interpret  language,  not  by  the  dic- 
tionary, but  by  the  life  and  experience  out  of 
which  it  grows,  need  have  no  difficulty  in  believ- 
ing that  both  statements  came  from  the  same 
man,  especially  when  it  is  borne  in  mind  that  he 
was  operating  with  traditional  material.  The 
hope  of  a  glorious  future  was  not  new  with 
Hosea.  He  accepted  it  from  the  past,  and  may 
not  have  felt  the  necessity  of  harmonizing  it 
with  his  message  of  doom.  Then,  besides,  we 
are  not,  of  course,  to  suppose  that  his  prophecies 
of  hope  and  those  of  doom  were  composed  at 
one  and  the  same  time.  They  may  have  been 
written  at  considerable  intervals  from  each 
other.  Their  present  arrangement  was  probably 
not  the  work  of  Hosea  himself.  But,  apart 
from  this,  strict,  formal  consistency  is  no  rule  of 
life.  It  belongs  only  to  the  closet  thinker.  No 
one  ought  to  expect  it  of  such  an  emotional  per- 
son as  Hosea.  His  conception,  moreover,  of  the 
passionate  love  of  Jehovah  must,  it  would  seem, 
have  led  ultimately  to  a  message  of  hope,  for 
where  there  is  no  faith  and  no  hope,  there  is  no 
love.  Love  believeth  all  things,  and  hopeth  all 
things.  The  promise,  therefore,  of  Israel's  re- 
storation was  the  natural  outcome  of  the  proph- 
123 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

et's  doctrine  of  the  divine  love,  and  an  integral 
part  of  his  message. 

This  promise,  it  is  true,  was  not  realized  in 
the  form  in  which  Hosea  expected  it.  Israel 
went  into  captivity  and  was  never  restored  to  her 
native  land.  But  hope  did  not  on  that  account 
die  out.  Hosea  had  made  the  great  thought 
of  the  love  of  God  the  permanent  possession  of 
mankind,  and  through  the  centuries  this  thought 
continued  to  generate  anew  fresh  hopes  for  the 
future.  These  hopes  from  being  national  be- 
came international,  and  from  being  political 
became  spiritual,  until,  finally,  they  culminated 
in  the  supreme  conception  of  human  history, 
that  of  the  God-man.  Hosea  himself  barely  re- 
fers to  the  Messianic  King  (i.  n),  but  his  pro- 
found conception  of  the  divine  love  points  more 
directly  than  any  specific  prediction  could  to 
Bethlehem  and  Calvary  and  the  right  hand  of 
God  where  intercession  is  made  for  us. 


124 


CHAPTER  IV 
ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

The  book  of  Isaiah  has  been  one  of  the  chief 
battlefields  of  modern  criticism.  The  struggle  is 
now  over.  It  is  at  present  generally  agreed 
that  a  large — indeed,  the  larger — part  of  the 
book  is  not  the  work  of  Isaiah,  the  son  of  Amoz. 
But  this  fact  has  not  materially  detracted  from 
the  significance  which  through  the  ages  has  at- 
tached to  him.  He  is  still  the  greatest  of 
prophets. 

Amos  and  Hosea,  as  we  have  seen,  owe  their 
present  distinction  chiefly  to  their  originality. 
This  is  also  one  element  in  the  greatness  of 
Isaiah.  As  Amos  was  the  first  to  identify  re- 
ligion absolutely  with  the  moral  law,  and  as 
Hosea  was  the  first  to  make  religion  funda- 
mentally a  matter  of  love,  so  Isaiah  was  the 
first  to  formulate  the  great  doctrine  of  faith  as 
the  condition  of  salvation.  In  originality,  there- 
fore, he  ranks  along  with  Amos  and  Hosea. 
But  to  this  he  added  other  qualities  of  a  unique 
character.  First,  he  possessed  extraordinary 
literary  ability.  As  a  writer  he  wielded  a  two- 
125 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

edged  sword.  "Never,"  says  Cornill,  "did  the 
speech  of  Canaan  pour  forth  with  more  brilliant 
splendor  and  triumphant  beauty  than  from  his 
lips.  He  has  a  strength  and  power  of  language, 
a  majesty  and  sublimity  of  expression,  and  an 
inexhaustible  richness  of  fitting  and  stirring- 
imagery,  that  overwhelms  the  reader,  nay,  be- 
wilders him."  In  the  next  place,  he  had  a  strong 
and  commanding  personality,  which,  by  virtue 
of  his  high  social  station  and  long  public  min- 
istry, he  was  able  to  bring  to  bear  with  tremen- 
dous power  upon  the  political  and  religious 
issues  of  the  day.  The  ministry  of  Amos  had 
apparently  been  of  brief  duration,  and  Hosea 
seems  to  have  stood  apart  from  the  controlling 
forces  in  the  nation's  life.  Isaiah,  on  the  other 
hand,  mingled  freely  with  the  leaders  of  the  day. 
He  watched  their  intrigues,  he  sought  to  cir- 
cumvent their  secret  plans,  he  denounced  their 
godless  policies.  Even  the  king  he  rebuked  to 
his  face  for  his  alliance  with  the  Assyrians.  In 
this  way,  through  a  long  ministry  of  forty  to 
fifty  years,  he  exerted  a  potent  influence  on  the 
public  life  of  the  nation,  and  thus  eventually 
won  for  himself  a  commanding  position  in  the 
affairs  of  state.  It  is  this  fact,  coupled  with  the 
originality  of  his  thought  and  his  unique  power 
of  expression,  that  has  given  to  him  his  pre- 
eminence among  the  prophets. 
126 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

In  view  of  Isaiah's  political  importance,  it  is 
natural  that  we  should  be  better  informed  with 
reference  to  his  life  than  that  of  either  Amos  or 
Hosea.  Not  only  does  he  refer  more  frequently 
to  himself;  there  are  also  references  to  him  in 
the  second  book  of  Kings  (chapters  19,  20; 
compare  Isa.  37  to  39).  Like  Amos,  he  was  a 
native  of  Judah,  but,  unlike  him,  he  lived  in  the 
capital  city  and  was  probably  of  noble  birth. 
This  we  infer  from  the  fact  that  he  seems  to 
have  had  ready  access  to  the  king  and  the  court 
(7.  3ff. ;  8.  2;  22.  i5ff.)-  He  was  married  and 
had  two  sons.  To  these  he  gave  symbolic 
names.  One  was  called  Shear-yashub — "A- 
remnant-shall-return"  (7.  3)  ;  and  the  other 
bore  the  less  easily  pronounceable  name,  Maher- 
shalal-hash-baz — "Swift-booty-speedy-prey"  (8. 
3).  These  names  expressed  two  important  as- 
pects of  the  prophet's  teaching.  So  wherever 
the  lads  went,  they  were  "for  signs  and  for  won- 
ders in  Israel"  (8.  18).  One  can  at  first  hardly 
withhold  a  feeling  of  sympathy  for  them  when 
one  thinks  that  they  were  thus  without  their 
own  consent  forced  to  be  the  constant  bearers 
of  such  serious  messages.  But  the  fact  that 
Isaiah  gave  them  these  names  is  an  eloquent  tes- 
timony to  the  intensity  of  his  own  prophetic 
conviction.  He  made  his  whole  household  con- 
tribute to  the  one  great  mission  of  his  life.  For 
127 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

his  wife  also  he  speaks  of  as  "the  prophetess" 

(8.  3). 

The  prophetic  call  came  to  Isaiah  "in  the  year 
that  King  Uzziah  died."  This  was  about  B.  C. 
740.  The  description  of  the  call  and  the  vision 
that  accompanied  it  is  one  of  the  most  impres- 
sive passages  in  the  Old  Testament  (chapter  6). 
The  prophet,  apparently  while  worshiping  in  the 
temple  (compare  verses  4  to  6),  sees  the  Lord  in 
his  heavenly  sanctuary  "sitting  upon  a  throne, 
high  and  lifted  up."  He  is  "the  King,  Jehovah 
of  hosts."  Naturally,  then,  he  is  accompa- 
nied by  an  angelic  retinue,  the  seraphim,  who 
hide  themselves  with  their  wings  from  the  glory 
of  his  presence  and  cry  one  to  the  other,  "Holy, 
holy,  holy  is  Jehovah  of  hosts :  the  whole  earth 
is  full  of  his  glory"  (6.  3).  They  do  not,  it 
may  be  noted,  pray  as  we  do  that  his  name  may 
be  hallowed,  and  that  his  kingdom  may  come 
and  his  will  be  done.  Theirs  is  a  voice  out  of 
eternity.  It  is  not  a  prayer;  it  is  a  proclama- 
tion. Already  for  them  the  divine  name  is 
hallowed ;  already  to  their  vision  the  whole  earth 
is  full  of  the  divine  glory.  This  conception  of 
the  majesty  and  holiness  of  Jehovah  was  deter- 
minative for  the  whole  ministry  of  Isaiah.  It 
was  the  thought  in  which  he  lived  and  moved 
and  had  his  being.  To  him  the  one  great  fact 
of  the  universe  was  the  sovereignty  of  God. 
128 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

"The  lofty  looks  of  men  shall  be  brought  low, 
and  the  haughtiness  of  men  shall  be  bowed 
down,  and  Jehovah  alone  shall  be  exalted" 
(2.  11).  This  was  his  almost  constant  theme. 
Nothing  might  with  impunity  exalt  itself  against 
the  Holy  One  of  Israel  (5.  19,  24).  His  will 
was  supreme  and  absolute  (14.  27). 

Over  against  such  an  august  presence  there 
was  only  one  feeling  that  could  enter  the 
prophet's  mind,  and  that  was  one  of  unworthi- 
ness  and  sinfulness.  But  this  feeling  did  not 
overwhelm  him  and  throw  him  into  a  state  of 
passivity.  He  received  the  assurance  of  the  di- 
vine forgiveness,  and  then  as  he  heard  the  voice 
of  the  Lord  saying,  "Whom  shall  I  send,  and 
who  will  go  for  us?"  promptly  replied,  "Here 
am  I;  send  me."  This  reply  was  characteristic 
of  the  man  and  of  his  conception  of  human  na- 
ture. However  weak  in  his  view  men  might  be 
without  God  (31.  3),  however  helpless  and  im- 
potent as  over  against  him  (10.  15;  2.  22), 
they  were  by  no  means  necessarily  ignoble  crea- 
tures, nor  was  their  proper  attitude  toward  him 
one  of  abject  dependence.  They  might  cooperate 
with  God,  might  further  his  purposes,  and  so 
by  an  active  faith  come  to  be  truly  his.  Drunk- 
enness (28.  7)  and  idolatry  (2.  8)  were  un- 
worthy of  them  as  human  beings,  and  so  also 
was  brutal  treatment  at  the  hands  of  others 
129 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

(3.  14L).  The  prophet  believed  in  the  dignity 
of  human  nature.  And  not  only  did  he  believe 
in  it,  he  illustrated  it  in  his  own  life.  His  was 
a  regal  mind.  In  the  face  of  the  most  threat- 
ening danger  he  stood  unmoved.  He  walked 
among  men  as  a  king.  He  trod  the  high  places 
of  the  earth. 

The  commission  Isaiah  received  in  his  in- 
augural vision  was  far  from  an  inspiring  one. 
His  message  was  to  be  one  of  doom,  doom  to 
both  Israel  and  Judah,  and  doom,  apparently,  to 
the  bitter  end.  The  reference  to  "the  holy  seed" 
in  6.  13,  which  is  lacking  in  the  Septuagint,  is 
commonly  supposed  to  be  a  later  addition.  But 
even*  if  it  belonged  to  the  original  call,  the 
gloominess  of  the  prophet's  commission  was  not 
greatly  relieved  thereby,  for  the  delivery  of  his 
message  was  to  have  the  reverse  effect  upon  the 
people  from  that  naturally  expected.  Instead 
of  leading  to  their  conversion  it  was  to  harden 
their  hearts  and  make  them  more  unresponsive 
than  ever  to  the  divine  word.  Indeed,  this  ac- 
tual effect  is  stated  as  though  it  were  the  purpose 
of  Isaiah's  mission  (verses  9,  10).  This  way 
of  putting  the  case  is,  of  course,  ironical,  and 
perhaps  reflects  to  some  extent  the  disappoint- 
ing experiences  of  later  years.  But  the  fact 
that  it  forms  a  part  of  the  inaugural  vision 
makes  it  clear  that  the  prophet  was  under  no 
130 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

illusion  with  reference  to  the  outcome  of  his 
ministry  even  at  the  outset.  Popular  success 
was  not  to  be  his.  Still,  he  devoted  himself  to 
his  divinely  appointed  task  with  intense  earnest- 
ness and  carried  on  his  mission  through  a  long 
lifetime  with  unfailing  fidelity  and  unwearying 
enthusiasm. 

The  ministry  of  Isaiah  was  so  intimately  con- 
nected with  the  history  of  the  nation  that  we 
need  the  latter  as  a  background  for  it.  After 
the  death  of  Uzziah,  in  B.  C.  740,  Jotham  came 
to  the  throne  and  ruled  perhaps  five  years.  In 
735  he  was  succeeded  by  Ahaz,  who  reigned 
sixteen  years.  After  him  came  Hezekiah,  who 
was  king  from  about  B.  C.  719  to  686.  Con- 
temporaneous with  these  kings  of  Judah  were 
four  Assyrian  kings — Tiglathpileser  III  (B.  C. 
747-722),  Shalmaneser  V  (B.  C.  727-722), 
Sargon  II  (B.  C.  722-705),  and  Sennacherib 
(B.  C.  705-681),  all  monarchs  of  great  ability, 
who  carried  on  victorious  campaigns  along  the 
eastern  coast  of  the  Mediterranean.  The  period 
covered  by  these  Assyrian  and  Judean  kings 
was  one  of  the  most  critical  in  the  whole  of  Isra- 
elitic  history.  A  number  of  very  important 
events  occurred  in  it.  In  B.  C.  734  took  place 
what  is  known  as  the  Syro-Ephraimitic  war. 
Rezin,  king  of  Syria,  and  Pekah,  king  of 
Ephraim,    conspired    together   to    depose   Ahaz, 

131 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

king  of  Judah.  The  attempt  failed,  but  it  led 
Ahaz  to  appeal  to  Assyria  for  aid.  The  result 
was  that  the  next  year  an  Assyrian  army  in- 
vaded the  northern  part  of  Israel,  devastated  the 
region  round  about  the  sea  of  Galilee,  and  de- 
ported a  large  number  of  the  inhabitants. 
Damascus  also  was  captured  the  following  year 
(B.  C.  732).  This,  as  well  as  the  preceding 
event,  was  a  serious  blow  to  Israel.  For  Da- 
mascus had  for  some  time  served  as  a  buffer 
between  Israel  and  Assyria,  and  its  capture  left 
the  way  open  to  the  Assyrian  armies  whenever 
they  might  choose  again  to  invade  Israelitic  ter- 
ritory. 

Ten  years  later,  in  B.  C.  722  or  721,  Samaria 
itself  fell  after  a  siege  of  three  years.  This  put 
an  end  forever  to  the  larger  part  of  the  old  Da- 
vidic  kingdom.  Strangely,  Isaiah,  while  he 
predicted  this  event  (17.  1-11;  9.  8-21;  28. 
1-4),  says  nothing  about  it  after  it  occurred. 
Nevertheless,  it  must  have  produced  a  profound 
impression  upon  the  surviving  kingdom  of 
Judah.  It  must  have  made  her  feel  that  she,  too, 
was  standing  on  the  brink.  But  after  a  few 
years  of  peace  and  quiet,  confidence  was  again 
restored,  and  in  711,  in  spite  of  the  strenuous 
opposition  of  Isaiah,  Hezekiah  was  apparently 
induced  to  join  with  Ashdod  and  other  Philis- 
tine cities  in  a  revolt  against  the  Assyrian  over- 
132 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

lord.  The  result  was  the  capture  of  Ashdod 
and  the  deportation  of  her  inhabitants.  Judah 
seems  somehow  to  have  escaped  punishment. 
Perhaps  on  the  approach  of  the  Assyrian  army 
she  may  have  renewed  her  allegiance  to  the 
Assyrian  king,  and  thus  have  succeeded  in  rein- 
stating herself  in  his  favor. 

But  whatever  occurred  at  this  time,  the  spirit 
of  revolt  was  still  kept  alive,  and  after  the  death 
of  Sargon  in  705  broke  out  again  with  new 
vigor.  Isaiah  once  more  attempted  to  stem  the 
tide,  but  all  to  no  avail.  Judah  and  most  of  the 
other  Palestinian  states,  spurred  on  by  Egypt, 
threw  off  the  Assyrian  yoke.  The  new  king 
Sennacherib  was  for  a  while  kept  busy  by  other 
revolts  in  the  east,  but  in  701  appeared  in  the 
west-land  with  a  large  army.  The  rebellious 
coast  cities  were  speedily  subdued,  and  then  de- 
tachments of  his  troops  began  marching  up  the 
valleys  of  Judah.  Forty-six  walled  cities,  so  the 
conqueror  tells  us,  were  captured,  and  Hezekiah 
himself  was  shut  up  in  Jerusalem  like  a  caged 
bird.  For  a  while  he  resisted,  but  finally  bought 
off  the  besiegers  by  paying  them  thirty  talents  of 
gold  and  three  hundred  talents  of  silver,  and 
surrendering  to  them  a  large  number  of  young 
men  and  women  as  hostages. 

What  took  place  immediately  after  this  is  a 
question.     The  common   opinion  has  been  that 

133 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

Sennacherib  resumed  his  march  toward  Egypt, 
but  shortly  afterward  repented  of  the  agreement 
he  had  made  with  Hezekiah,  and  so  in  direct 
violation  of  his  word  sent  back  a  demand  for 
the  unconditional  surrender  of  the  city.  But 
this  demand  he  was  unable  to  make  good.  Be- 
cause of  a  pestilence  or  political  disturbances  at 
home,  his  Egyptian  campaign  was  suddenly  in- 
terrupted and  he  was  forced  to  return  to  As- 
syria. More  recently,  however,  the  tendency 
among  Assyriologists  has  been  to  assign  this 
event  to  a  later  date.  Some  put  it  in  B.  C.  690, 
and  others  a  few  years  later  still.  If  this  view 
be  correct,  the  campaign  of  701  ended  with 
Hezekiah's  payment  of  tribute  and  promise  of 
allegiance  for  the  future.  It  was  not,  then, 
until  ten  or  fifteen  years  later  that  Sennacherib 
demanded  the  surrender  of  Jerusalem  and  was 
providentially  prevented  from  enforcing  his  de- 
mand. As  Isaiah  was  still  active  in  Jerusalem 
at  the  time  this  demand  was  made,  it  is  clear 
that,  if  the  later  date  be  correct,  his  ministry 
must  have  been  ten  or  even  fifteen  years  longer 
than  has  commonly  been  supposed.  That  it 
lasted  forty  years  has  always  been  clear,  but  the 
more  recent  view  implies  that  it  extended  over  a 
period  of  at  least  fifty  and  perhaps  fifty-five 
years.  In  harmony  with  this  is  the  fact  that 
according  to  later  Jewish  tradition  Isaiah  met 
i34 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

a  martyr's  death  during  the  reign  of  Manasseh, 
that  is,  after  B.  C.  686. 

With  the  main  events  of  this  important  period 
of  Hebrew  history  in  mind,  let  us  now  consider 
more  particularly  Isaiah's  personal  relation  to 
them.  At  the  time  of  the  Syro-Ephraimitic  war, 
Ahaz  was  in  great  fear,  and  so  one  day  went 
out  to  inspect  the  water  supply  of  Jerusalem  to 
make  sure  that  it  would  not  be  cut  off  in  case 
of  a  siege  (7.  1-13).  While  there,  Isaiah,  ac- 
companied by  his  son  Shear-yashub,  went  out 
to  meet  him.  He  assured  the  king  that  there 
was  no  real  cause  of  alarm.  The  two  hostile 
kings,  Pekah  and  Rezin,  were  not  to  be  taken 
seriously.  They  were  simply  two  tails  of  smok- 
ing firebrands,  "the  last  flicker  of  two  expiring 
torches."  Before  long  they  would  both  be  sub- 
dued by  the  Assyrians.  Moreover,  the  very  fact 
that  their  design  was  an  evil  one,  opposed  to  the 
will  of  Jehovah,  was  a  guarantee  that  it  would 
come  to  naught.  With  Jehovah  as  guardian 
and  protector  of  Jerusalem  there  was  no  reason 
to  fear  Samaria  and  Damascus  with  their 
merely  human  chiefs.  All  that  Ahaz  needed 
was  faith. 

But  Ahaz  was  a  child  of  the  Dragon's  teeth. 
He  required  something  more  substantial  than  a 
merely  spiritual  principle  to  bolster  him  up. 
Isaiah,   therefore,   declared   that   Jehovah    stood 

135 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

ready  to  perform  a  miracle,  if  necessary,  in 
order  to  convince  him  of  the  truth  of  his  mes- 
sage, and,  furthermore,  challenged  him  to  ask 
for  such  a  sign  in  the  heavens  above  or  the  earth 
beneath.  But  Ahaz  dared  not  accept  the  chal- 
lenge. The  fact  is  he  had  already  decided  to 
appeal  to  Assyria  for  aid,  and  in  his  heart  of 
hearts  believed  that  the  king  of  Assyria  was 
more  to  be  trusted  than  Jehovah.  So  the  two 
men  parted,  one  seeking  with  fear  and  trembling 
the  aid  of  a  foreign  power,  the  other  buoyed  up 
by  an  unshakable  religious  faith. 

Events  turned  out  as  Isaiah  had  predicted. 
The  two  northern  kingdoms  of  Samaria  and 
Damascus  were  soon  overrun  by  the  Assyrians, 
and  Judah  was  left  in  a  tributary  relation  to 
the  invaders.  When  this  relationship  had  once 
been  established,  Isaiah  looked  upon  it  as  bind- 
ing and  had  no  sympathy  with  the  spirit  of 
revolt.  We  have  a  good  illustration  of  this  in 
connection  with  the  rebellion  of  Ashdod  in  B.  C. 
711  (chapter  20).  Efforts  had  been  made  for 
years  by  the  emissaries  of  Ethiopia  and  Egypt 
to  induce  Judah  to  join  in  the  rebellion,  and  a 
measure  of  success  seems  to  have  attended  these 
efforts.  But  Isaiah  opposed  them  with  all  the 
intensity  of  his  being.  He  declared  that  such 
a  revolt  would  certainly  be  disastrous,  and  that 
Egypt  and  Ethiopia  instead  of  rendering  aid  to 
136 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

the  revolting  states  would  themselves  be  carried 
away  into  ignominious  captivity.  Then,  in  order 
to  emphasize  this  message,  he  walked  three  years 
through  the  streets  of  Jerusalem  clad  as  a  cap- 
tive, barefoot  and  almost  naked.  We  get  some 
idea  of  the  complete  abandon,  the  almost  fanat- 
ical intensity  of  Isaiah  from  such  a  scene  as 
this.  Here  is  a  man  of  high  social  station,  prob- 
ably related  to  the  royal  family,  who  is  willing- 
through  three  long  years  to  expose  himself  to 
the  jeers  and  scorn  of  his  fellow  townsmen 
in  order  to  impress  upon  them  an  important  but 
unwelcome  truth. 

The  same  opposition  to  a  break  with  Assyria 
manifested  itself  again  eight  or  ten  years  later 
when  another  revolt  was  instigated.  Isaiah  de- 
nounced any  alliance  with  Egypt  (30.  1-7; 
31.  1-3).  Those  leaders  of  Judah,  he  declared, 
who  were  seeking  to  bring  it  about  were  doing 
so  against  the  will  of  Jehovah,  and  would  con- 
sequently derive  from  it  no  profit,  but  would, 
rather,  be  thrown  by  it  into  shame  and  confu- 
sion. Between  Egypt,  on  the  one  hand,  with 
her  chariots  and  horsemen,  and  Jehovah  on  the 
other,  the  prophet  saw  a  complete  antithesis. 
"The  Egyptians,"  he  says,  "are  men.  and  not 
God;  and  their  horses  flesh,  and  not  spirit" 
(31.  3).  God  and  spirit  he  thus  directly  op- 
posed to  men  and  flesh.  And  as  between  the 
137 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

two  there  was  no  doubt  in  his  own  mind  which 
would  ultimately  triumph. 

But  most  of  his  countrymen  did  not  see 
things  as  he  did.  One  day,  for  instance,  he 
came  upon  a  company  of  reveling  prophets  and 
priests,  and  began  to  rebuke  them  not  only  for 
their  drunkenness  but  also  because  they  were 
by  their  false  visions  and  judgments  encourag- 
ing the  spirit  of  revolt  (28.  7-13).  In  reply 
they  asked  him  if  he  thought  he  was  talking  to 
babes,  and  then  uttered  a  number  of  monosylla- 
bles which  are  really  untranslatable.  They  are 
rendered  in  the  English  version  by  the  words, 
"precept  upon  precept,  precept  upon  precept; 
line  upon  line,  line  upon  line;  here  a  little,  there 
a  little."  But  this  rendering  fails  altogether  to 
reproduce  the  force  of  the  original.  And  I  am 
inclined  to  think  it  would  be  better  simply  to 
transliterate  what  we  have  in  the  Hebrew,  and 
then  leave  it  to  the  reader  to  get  from  it  such 
meaning  as  he  can.  The  actual  words  used  were 
these:  "Tsav  le-tsav,  tsav  le-tsav;  kav  le-kav, 
kav  le-kav" — Here  a  little,  there  a  little."  Now, 
exactly  what  meaning  these  words  were  intended 
to  convey  we  do  not  know  with  certainty.  Two 
different  interpretations  are  suggested  by  the 
context.  The  reference  to  babes  in  28.  9  sug- 
gests that  they  may  have  been  the  words  used 
in  teaching  a  child  to  walk.  On  the  other  hand, 
138 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

the  reference  to  strange  lips  and  another  tongue 
in  28.  1 1  suggests  that  we  have  here  an  imitation 
of  the  effect  produced  upon  the  ears  of  a  He- 
brew by  the  unintelligible  speech  of  a  foreigner. 
What,  then,  the  priests  and  the  prophets  meant 
was  to  express  their  complete  indifference  to  the 
prophet's  message.  It  had  no  more  significance 
to  them  than  the  rude  jargon  of  a  foreigner. 
But  whatever  may  have  been  the  original  mean- 
ing of  these  monosyllables,  they  were  at  least  in- 
tended to  be  scornful.  And  so  Isaiah  turned  to 
the  reveling  prophets  and  priests  and  said : 
"You  have  spurned  my  instruction,  you  have  re- 
fused to  adopt  my  policy  of  peace;  therefore, 
Jehovah  will  speak  to  you  in  the  rude^ barbaric 
speech  of  the  invader.  He  will  use  in  address- 
ing you  the  very  words  you  have  attributed  to 
me.  He  will  say  to  you,  'Tsav  le-tsav;  tsav  le- 
tsav;  kav  le-kav,  kav  le-kav — Here  a  little, 
there  a  little,'  until  he  has  driven  you  to  your 
ruin." 

Another  striking  scene  from  the  same  period 
of  the  prophet's  ministry  is  found  in  chapter  22. 
The  people  have  assembled  on  the  housetops.  It 
is  a  gala  day.  There  is  shouting  and  rejoicing. 
What  the  exact  occasion  was  we  do  not  know. 
As  good  a  suggestion  as  any  is  that  it  was  a 
celebration  of  Hezekiah's  declaration  of  in- 
dependence from  Assyria.  This  the  people 
139 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

thought  would  mean  a  new  era  to  them.  And 
so  there  was  joy  and  gladness.  But  the  prophet 
looks  upon  it  very  differently.  He  sees  in  it 
simply  an  unwarranted  revolt,  that  is  certain 
to  bring  with  it  a  dire  penalty.  In  the  midst, 
therefore,  of  the  festive  throng  he  breaks  out 
into  a  lamentation  as  he  thinks  of  the  impend- 
ing doom  (verse  2D-3).  Some  bystanders 
overhear  his  cry  of  grief  and  try  to  console 
him,  but  he  thrusts  them  aside,  saying,  "Look 
away  from  me,  I  will  weep  bitterly;  labor 
not  to  comfort  me  for  the  destruction  of  the 
daughter  of  my  people"  (verse  4).  The  revolt 
from  Assyria  ought  to  have  been  a  "call  to 
weeping,  and  to  mourning,  and  to  baldness,  and 
to  girding  with  sackcloth"  (verse  12).  But 
here  instead  we  have  a  day  of  frivolous  gayety, 
a  day  of  feasting  and  rejoicing,  "slaying  oxen 
and  killing  sheep,  eating  flesh  and  drinking 
wine"  (verse  13).  There  are  those  in  the  as- 
sembled multitude  who  know  well  enough  the 
prophet's  opinion  of  the  revolt,  who  know  that 
he  has  predicted  that  it  would  speedily  be  fol- 
lowed by  ruin  and  death.  But  they  have  no  fear, 
and  so  in  their  light-hearted  festivities  encour- 
age one  another,  saying,  with  gleeful  scorn : 
"Let  us  eat  and  drink,  for  to-morrow  (as  the 
prophet  says)  we  shall  die"  (verse  13).  On 
hearing  this,  Isaiah's  soul  is  stirred  to  its  deep- 
140 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

est  depths,  and  he  cries  out — the  very  words, 
he  says,  ringing  in  his  ears  as  he  hears  them 
from  Jehovah — "Surely  this  iniquity  shall  not 
be  forgiven  you  till  ye  die"  (verse  14). 

From  these  scenes  it  is  clear  what  Isaiah's 
attitude  was  toward  the  attempts  made  by  his 
countrymen  to  throw  off  the  Assyrian  yoke. 
But  there  is  another  side  to  the  picture.  While 
Isaiah  opposed  the  spirit  of  revolt  in  Judah  and 
while  he  counseled  submission  to  Assyria,  he 
was  by  no  means  satisfied  with  the  role  that  the 
latter  was  playing  in  the  world.  She  was,  to 
be  sure,  the  rod  of  Jehovah's  anger  and  the  staff 
of  his  indignation.  She  was  commissioned  by 
him  to  punish  Judah  and  other  nations  for  their 
sins.  But  this  commission  she  did  not  herself 
recognize  (10.  5-7).  It  was  wholly  ideal.  It  ex- 
isted only  in  the  mind  of  Jehovah  and  his 
prophet.  She  herself  was  actuated  simply  by  a 
heathen  lust  for  power.  She  saw  no  spiritual 
purpose  in  her  campaigns.  She  acknowledged  no 
superintending  Providence.  She  knew  no  God 
worthy  of  the  name.  Against  Jehovah  she  ex- 
alted herself  in  pride  (10.  12-15).  To  her  ag- 
gressions, therefore,  it  was  evident  there  must  be 
some  limit.  Her  arrogance  could  not  be  perma- 
nently tolerated.  The  time  must  needs  come 
when  she  would  overstep  the  bounds  of  the  di- 
vine patience.  And  so  we  find  in  Isaiah  a  num- 
141 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

ber  of  passages  in  which  her  sudden  overthrow 
is  predicted  (14.  24-27;  17.  12-14;  10.  16-34; 
30-  27S3;  31-  4-9;  l8-  5-6;  29.  5-8).  The 
authenticity  of  all  these  passages  has  been  called 
in  question  by  some  critics  on  the  ground  that 
they  are  inconsistent  with  other  utterances  of 
the  prophet.  There  is,  it  is  claimed,  no  period 
in  the  prophet's  life  when  the  change  from  the 
conception  of  Assyria  as  the  instrument  of  Je- 
hovah to  that  of  Assyria  as  a  God-hostile  power 
could  have  taken  place.  But  this  is  a  mistake. 
Such  a  period,  if  it  were  needed,  could  be  found, 
as  Staerk  has  shown,  between  B.  C.  701  and  690. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  it  is  clear  from 
what  was  said  above  (compare  10.  7-1 1)  that 
the  idea  of  Assyria  as  a  power  hostile  to  Jeho- 
vah must  have  always  lain  near  to  the  prophet's 
thought.  Moreover,  this  conception  was  quite 
in  line  with  the  old  eschatological  idea  of  the 
final  overthrow  of  the  enemies  of  Israel.  There- 
fore, all  that  was  needed  was  some  special  occa- 
sion to  call  it  forth.  And  one  such  occasion  at 
least  was  furnished  by  Sennacherib  (2  Kings 
19  and  20;  Isa.  36  to  39). 

When  this  occasion  came,  whether  in  701  or 
690,  or  even  later,  is  a  question.  But  whatever 
its  date,  it  consisted  in  the  demand  of  Sen- 
nacherib for  the  unconditional  surrender  of  Je- 
rusalem. Whether  this  demand  was  in  direct 
142 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

violation  of  an  agreement  he  had  just  made  with 
Hezekiah  or  not,  it  was  at  least  unjust.  When, 
therefore,  it  came,  Isaiah  stepped  forward,  just 
as  he  had  done  in  the  time  of  Ahaz  when  the 
city  was  threatened  in  a  similar  way  by  Pekah 
and  Rezin,  and  assured  the  king  that  there  was 
no  real  ground  for  fear.  Sennacherib,  he  de- 
clared, would  never  lay  siege  to  the  city,  but 
the  Lord  would  put  his  hook  in  his  nose  and 
lead  him  back  by  the  way  that  he  came  (37.  29). 
There  was  no  outward  indication  that  any  such 
thing  would  occur.  Nevertheless,  this  very 
thing  took  place.  On  the  borders  of  Egypt,  as 
we  have  already  seen,  because  of  a  pestilence  or 
political  disturbances  at  home,  Sennacherib  sud- 
denly stayed  his  advance,  returned  to  Assyria, 
and  never  again  appeared  in  the  west-land.  This 
was  a  remarkable  fulfillment  of  a  specific  predic- 
tion— perhaps  the  most  remarkable  in  all  the 
Old  Testament — and  must  have  produced  a  pro- 
found impression  in  Jerusalem.  It  was  not,  it 
is  true,  an  exact  fulfillment  of  Isaiah's  other 
anti-Assyrian  prophecies.  But  it  at  least  shows 
what  may  have  occasioned  them. 

After  this  survey  of  the  life  of  Isaiah  and  the 

history  of  his  times,  we  are  ready  to  turn  to  the 

book  itself  which  bears  his  name.     This  book 

is  one  of  the  longest   in  the  Bible,   containing 

143 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

sixty-six  chapters.  There  are  two  parts  to  it — 
chapters  i  to  39  and  40  to  66.  The  latter  forms 
a  book  by  itself,  and  is  commonly  assigned  to 
another  author,  known  as  Second  or  Deutero- 
Isaiah,  who  probably  lived  one  hundred  and  fifty 
or  two  hundred  years  later  than  Isaiah  and  who 
was  hardly  a  less  significant  prophet  than  Isaiah 
himself.  The  first  part  of  the  book  may  be  sub- 
divided into  six  divisions:  chapters  1  to  12,  13 
to  23,  24  to  27,  28  to  33,  34  and  35,  and  36  to 
39.  Of  these,  chapters  36  to  39  are  for  the  most 
part  an  excerpt  from  2  Kings  and  hence  cannot 
be  attributed  to  Isaiah.  Chapters  34  and  35  and 
24  to  27  are  also  generally  assigned  to  later 
hands.  This  leaves  chapters  1  to  23  and  28  to 
33.  In  these  chapters  later  additions  are  no 
doubt  to  be  found,  for  example,  13.  1  to  14.  23; 
21.  1-17.  But  here,  as  elsewhere,  in  the  pro- 
phetic literature,  the  tendency  to  call  in  the 
"later  hand"  has  in  recent  years  been  carried  to 
a  wholly  unjustifiable  extreme.  The  anti-As- 
syrian prophecies  in  Isaiah,  for  instance,  the 
Messianic  prophecies,  and  the  passages  that  seem 
to  teach  the  inviolability  of  Jerusalem  have  all 
been  declared  to  be  later  additions.  For  this 
there  is  no  adequate  ground,  and  against  this  an- 
alytic procedure  there  is  certain  to  be  a  reaction. 
Indeed,  the  reaction  has  already  set  in.  Old 
Testament  scholars  in  increasing  numbers  are 
144 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

coming  to  see  that  the  Procrustean  beds  which 
many  modern  critics  have  made  for  the  ancient 
prophets  are  too  short  to  fit  the  actual  historical 
personalities. 

In  reading  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  we  are 
first  impressed,  as  we  were  also  in  the  cases  of 
Amos  and  Hosea,  with  the  prominence  of  the 
message  of  doom.  Throughout  practically  the 
whole  of  his  ministry  this  seems  to  have  been 
the  staple  of  his  public  discourses.  From  his 
inaugural  vision  in  B.  C.  740  down,  at  least,  to 
the  invasion  of  Sennacherib  in  701,  the  one 
thing  he  seems  to  have  been  most  concerned  to 
impress  upon  the  people  of  his  day  was  the  fact 
of  the  impending  doom.  He  predicted  it  again 
and  again  under  the  most  varied  forms.  These 
predictions  were,  of  course,  based  upon  the  con- 
viction of  the  certainty  of  their  fulfillment.  But 
they  were  not  made  simply  as  pieces  of  vaticina- 
tion. Their  purpose  was  a  practical  one — to 
arouse  the  people  to  moral  earnestness  and  to  a 
sense  of  their  obligation  to  Jehovah.  The  doom 
thus  predicted  applied,  as  we  have  seen,  to  Israel 
as  well  as  Judah.  Nor  was  it  to  be  confined  to 
the  Hebrews.  There  was  to  be  a  day  of  doom 
for  the  Assyrians  also.  Indeed,  it  was  to  be 
general.  "There  shall  be,"  says  the  prophet,  "a 
day  of  Jehovah  of  hosts  upon  all  that  is  proud 
and  haughty,  and  upon  all  that  is  lifted  up;  and 
145 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

it  shall  be  brought  low"  (2.  12).  Isaiah,  like 
the  other  prophets,  felt  himself  standing  face 
to  face  with  a  great  and  decisive  day  of  judg- 
ment. The  impending  catastrophe  was  not  to 
be  simply  political.  It  was  to  be  an  "overflow- 
ing scourge"  (28.  15,  18),  involving  the  destiny 
of  all.  So  back  of  his  message  of  doom  lay 
all  the  grounds  of  passionate  earnestness  that 
are  to  be  found  in  the  discourses  of  any  preacher 
who  is  dealing  with  the  eternal  issues  of  life. 

A  second  fact  that  impresses  us  as  we  read 
the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  is  that  the  moral  and 
religious  condition  of  Judah  in  his  time  was 
essentially  the  same  as  that  of  Israel  in  the  prac- 
tically contemporaneous  period  of  Amos  and 
Hosea.  There  was  the  same  oppression  of  the 
poor  by  the  rich,  the  same  general  corruption, 
the  same  idolatry,  the  same  trust  in  ceremonial- 
ism, and  the  same  seeking  of  foreign  aid.  I  Isaiah 
condemns  the  princes  as  "rebellious,  and  com- 
panions of  thieves"  (1.  23).  They  "crush,"  he 
says,  "my  people,  and  grind  the  face  of  the 
poor"  (3.  15).  They  "justify  the  wicked  for 
a  bribe"  (5.  23),  and  "rob  the  poor  of  my  people 
of  their  right"  (10.  2).  Drunkenness  he  like- 
wise condemns  (5.  11,  22;  28.  7),  and  the  luxury 
of  the  wanton  women  (3.  i6ff. ).  The  whole 
people,  he  says,  are  "laden  with  iniquity,  a  seed 
of  evildoers"  (1.  4).  "The  whole  head  is  sick, 
146 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

and  the  whole  heart  faint.  From  the  sole  of 
the  foot  even  unto  the  head  there  is  no  sound- 
ness in  it"  (i.  5,  6).  The  land,  furthermore,  is 
"full  of  idols";  the  people  "worship  the  work 
of  their  own  hands,  that  which  their  own  fingers 
have  made"  (2.  8).  They  are  also  "full  of 
divination,  and  are  soothsayers  like  the  Philis- 
tines, and  practice  sorcery  as  the  children  of 
foreigners"  (2.  6,  emended  text).  To  be  sure, 
they  profess  belief  in  Jehovah.  They  are  as- 
siduous in  the  performance  of  sacrifices  and  the 
offering  of  incense.  But  their  worship  is  wholly 
formal.  "They  draw  nigh  unto  me  with  their 
mouth,  and  with  their  lips  do  honor  me,  but 
have  removed  their  heart  far  from  me,  and  their 
fear  of  me  is  a  commandment  of  men  which 
hath  been  taught  them"  (29.  13).  What  they 
really  believe  in  is  not  Jehovah,  but  silver  and 
gold,  horses  and  chariots,  soldiers  and  horsemen. 
Hence,  instead  of  seeking  the  aid  of  Jehovah 
they  seek  the  aid  of  foreign  powers.  They  go 
first  to  Assyria,  and  then  when  the  Assyrian 
overlordship  becomes  burdensome  seek  the  aid 
of  Egypt.  Their  policy  throughout  is  an  irre- 
ligious militarism.  It  is  a  placing  of  trust  in 
men  and  flesh  rather  than  in  God  and  spirit. 

In  meeting  this  general  situation  Isaiah's  tone 
resembles    that    of    Amos    rather   than    that    of 
Hosea.     In    only    one    instance    do    we    find    a 
M7 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

distinctly  Hoseanic  or  Jeremianic  strain  in  his 
prophecies  (22.  4).  As  a  rule,  he  is  stern  and 
severe,  showing  very  little  sympathy  with  the 
wrongdoers  of  his  day.  Take,  for  instance, 
the  woes  in  5.  8-23  on  the  greedy  land-grab- 
bers (verses  8-10),  the  careless  revelers  (verses 
1 1 -13),  the  frivolous  unbelievers  (verses  18, 
19),  the  moral  skeptics  (verse  20),  the  sophists 
of  the  time  (verse  21),  and  the  dissolute  and 
jcorrupt  judges  (verses  22,  23).  Or  take  the 
!  treatment  of  religious  rites  and  ceremonies  in 
1.  11-17: 

What  unto  me  is  the  multitude  of  your  sacrifices?  saith 

Jehovah : 
I  have  had  enough  of  the  burnt  offerings  of  rams,  and  the 

fat  of  fed  beasts ; 
And  I  delight  not  in  the  blood  of  bullocks,  or  of  lambs, 

or  of  he-goats. 
When  ye  come  to  appear  before  me, 
Who    hath    required    this    at   your    hand,    to    trample   my 

courts  ? 
Bring  no  more  vain  oblations;  incense  is  an  abomination 

unto  me ; 
New  moon  and  sabbath,  the  calling  of  assemblies, — I  can- 
not away  with  iniquity  and  the  solemn  meeting. 
Your    new    moons    and    your    appointed    feasts    my    soul 

hateth ; 
They  are  a  trouble  unto  me;  I  am  weary  of  bearing  them. 
And  when  ye  spread  forth  your  hands,  I  will  hide  mine 

eyes  from  you ; 
Yea,  when  ye  make  many  prayers,  I  will  not  hear : 
Your   hands    are    full    of    blood.      Wash    you,    make   you 

clean ; 

148 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

Put  away  the  evil  of  your  doings  from  before  mine  eyes ; 
Cease  to  do  evil,  learn  to  do  well ; 
Seek  justice,  relieve  the  oppressed, 
Judge  the  fatherless,  plead  for  the  widow. 

This  is  one  of  the  most  important  utterances 
anywhere  to  be  found  on  the  worthlessness  of 
mere  ceremonialism  (compare  Amos  5.  21-24J 
kHos.  6.  6;  Mic.  6.  6-8).  It  is  followed  by  a 
verse  which  looks  at  first  like  a  promise  of  for- 
giveness (1.  18).  Indeed,  it  is  so  rendered  in 
the  English  version:  "Come  now,  and  let  us 
reason  together,  saith  Jehovah :  though  your  sins 
be  as  scarlet,  they  shall  be  as  white  as  snow; 
though  they  be  red  like  crimson,  they  shall  be 
as  wool."  But  such  an  offer  of  pardon  is  hardly 
in  harmony  with  the  preceding  passage  nor  with 
the  tone  of  the  Isaianic  prophecies  as  a  whole.  It 
is  probable,  therefore,  that  the  last  two  sen- 
tences of  the  verse  should  be  treated  as  ques- 
tions :  "Come,  let  us  implead  one  another,  saith 
Jehovah:  if  your  sins  be  as  scarlet,  shall  they 
become  white  as  snow  ?  Be  they  red  as  crimson, 
shall  they  become  as  wool?"  The  answer,  of 
course,  is  an  emphatic  "No."  The  popular  idea 
that  sins  may  be  removed  by  sacrifices  is  wholly 
without  foundation.  The  very  thought  of  it  is 
utterly  to  be  spurned. 

But  while  the  general  tone  of  Isaiah's  proph- 
ecies thus  resembles  that  of  Amos,  there  is  one 
149 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

important  regard  in  which  his  method  of  deal- 
ing with  the  evils  of  his  day  is  like  that  of 
Hosea.  Hosea  carried  back  all  the  sins  of  the 
people  to  one  root  evil — that  of  unfaithfulness 
to  Jehovah.  Their  immorality,  their  idolatry, 
their  man-made  kings,  their  seeking  of  foreign 
aid,  all  he  regarded  as  instances  of  apostasy 
from  Jehovah.  And  so  in  Isaiah  we  find  a  sim- 
ilar tendency  to  reduce  the  moral  and  religious 
life  to  one  underlying  principle.  This  principle 
in  Isaiah  is  faith.  In  his  view,  then,  the  cardinal 
sin  of  Israel  is  unbelief  or  pride.  In  developing 
this  idea  of  one  root  principle  in  the  moral  and 
religious  life,  Isaiah  is  not  so  thoroughgoing  as 
Hosea.  He  does  not  speak  so  frequently  of 
faith  as  Hosea  does  of  love,  nor  does  he  ascribe 
the  different  evils  of  his  day  to  unbelief  or  pride 
in  the  same  direct  way  that  Hosea  attributes 
them  to  disloyalty  to  Jehovah.  Nevertheless,  it 
is  clear  to  the  careful  student  that  this  repre- 
sents his  fundamental  thought. 

It  was  in  connection  with  the  political  policy 
of  Judah  that  Isaiah's  doctrine  of  faith  received 
its  clearest  expression.  That  policy  was,  when 
the  country  was  in  danger  or  oppressed,  to  seek 
aid  from  outside.  Ahaz,  for  instance,  when  he 
was  threatened  by  Pekah  and  Rezin,  sought  help 
from  Assyria.  And  later  Hezekiah,  when  the 
Assyrian  yoke  became  heavy,  appealed  to  Egypt 
150 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

for  relief.  As  against  this  policy,  Isaiah  pleaded 
for  faith  in  Jehovah.  To  Ahaz,  who  was  trem- 
bling with  fear  at  the  approach  of  the  two  kings 
from  the  north,  he  said,  "Take  heed,  and  be 
quiet;  fear  not,  neither  let  thy  heart  be  faint" 
(7.  4).  And  then  after  assuring  him  that  Je- 
hovah would  not  permit  the  design  of  these  en- 
emies to  be  carried  out,  he  adds  this  word  of 
warning:  "If  ye  will  not  believe,  surely  ye  shall 
not  be  established"  (7.  9).  In  the  original  this 
memorable  utterance  contains  a  paronomasia, 
which  makes  it  somewhat  more  striking.  "No 
faith,  no  fixity"  is  the  way  McFadyen  renders 
it.  G.  A.  Smith  puts  it  thus:  "If  ye  will  not 
have  faith,  ye  shall  not  have  staith."  And  Box 
has  this  rendering:  "Verily,  if  thou  have  no 
strong  trust — no  trusty  stronghold  shall  be 
thine."  The  important  thing,  however,  is  not 
the  form  of  the  statement  but  its  meaning.  It 
is  here  clearly  stated — and  for  the  first  time  so 
far  as  we  know — that  faith  is  the  condition  of 
salvation.  If  Judah  was  to  be  saved,  it  could 
be  only  by  faith  in  Jehovah.  His  presence  in  Je- 
rusalem, typified  by  the  "waters  of  Shiloah  that 
go  softly,"  was  their  only  security.  When  the 
people,  therefore,  refused  these  waters  the 
prophet  declared  that  they  would  certainly  be 
deluged  by  the  overflowing  waters  of  the 
Euphrates    (8.    5-8).     Assyria   whom  they  had 

151 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

appealed  to  for  help  would  prove  the  cause  of 
their  ruin. 

Likewise,  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  when  the 
spirit  of  revolt  against  Assyria  broke  out,  and 
an  alliance  was  about  to  be  made  with  Egypt, 
Isaiah  again  pleaded  for  a  policy  of  peace  and 
trust.  "This,"  he  said,  "is  the  rest,  give  ye  rest 
to  him  that  is  weary ;  and  this  is  the  refreshing : 
yet  they  would  not  hear"  (28.  12).  In  the 
midst  of  the  intriguing  and  the  confusion  he 
therefore  pointed  once  more  to  the  quiet  pres- 
ence of  Jehovah  in  Jerusalem  as  the  one  ground 
of  confidence.  "Thus  saith  the  Lord  Jehovah, 
Behold  I  lay  in  Zion  for  a  foundation  a  stone, 
a  tried  stone,  a  precious  corner  stone  of  sure 
foundation :  he  that  believeth  shall  not  be  in 
haste"  (28.  16).  And  then  a  little  later  he 
added :  "By  sitting  still  and  resting  shall  ye  be 
saved;  in  quietness  and  confidence  shall  be  your 
strength.  And  ye  would  not"  (30.  15).  Some- 
what later  still — perhaps  as  late  as  B.  C.  690 — 
an  embassy  from  Ethiopia  came  to  Jerusalem, 
evidently  for  the  purpose  of  inducing  Judah  to 
join  in  a  league  against  Assyria.  The  time 
seems  to  have  been  a  perilous  one.  The  Assyr- 
ian armies  were  again  threatening  the  west- 
land.  Terror  and  confusion  were  abroad.  Nev- 
ertheless, Isaiah  remained  undisturbed,  and  sent 
the  Ethiopian  ambassadors  away  with  the  assur- 
es 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

ance  that  he  saw  no  occasion  for  alarm.  "For 
thus,"  he  says,  "hath  Jehovah  said  unto  me,  I 
will  be  still,  and  I  will  look  on  in  my  dwelling 
place,  like  clear  heat  in  sunshine,  like  a  cloud  of 
dew  in  the  heat  of  harvest"  (18.  4).  In  this 
sublime  utterance  we  have  the  climax  of  the 
prophet's  expression  of  faith.  What  more  per- 
fect symbols  of  the  divine  calm  could  be  found 
than  the  motionless  air  of  a  hot  summer  day 
and  the  invisible  cloud  of  dew  in  harvest  time! 
And  what  finer  and  surer  evidence  could  there 
be  of  the  prophet's  own  unruffled  trust  than  this 
vivid  apprehension  on  his  part  of  the  eternal 
calm  of  God  in  the  midst  of  earth's  turmoil! 

In  all  the  passages  just  cited  Isaiah  advocates, 
directly  or  indirectly,  trust  in  Jehovah  as  against 
all  political  intriguing.  It  is  thus  an  interesting- 
fact  that  the  doctrine  of  faith  was  first  formu- 
lated as  a  political  or  rather  anti-political  policy. 
Isaiah  took  the  position  that  it  was  unwise  for 
Judah  to  enter  into  entangling  alliances  with 
other  nations,  that  such  alliances  would  simply 
mean  ruin  to  herself.  The  prudent  thing  for 
her  to  do  was  to  accept  the  status  quo,  trust  in 
Jehovah,  do  his  will,  and  await  the  time  when 
he  himself  would  redeem  her.  This  policy  has 
been  commended  by  modern  critics  as  that  of  a 
far-sighted  statesman.  And  it  is  probably  true 
that   Isaiah   estimated   more   correctly   than   the 

153 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

Judean  kings  and  their  counselors  the  political 
forces  of  the  day.  He  saw  more  clearly  than 
they  the  hopelessness  of  any  revolt  against  As- 
syria. But  still  it  would  be  a  mistake  to  sup- 
pose that  the  policy  he  advocated  was  simply  the 
outcome  of  clear  political  insight.  It  was, 
rather,  the  expression  of  an  idealistic  faith.  He 
believed  that  the  really  controlling  forces  in  the 
world  were  spiritual,  not  material;  divine,  not 
human.  Hence,  the  one  important  thing  for 
Judah  to  do  was  to  obey  the  will  of  God,  to  put 
herself  on  his  side.  It  was  thus  a  deep  religious 
conviction  that  was  at  once  the  source  and  sub- 
stance of  Isaiah's  political  policy.  In  the  ordi- 
nary sense  of  the  term  he  was  not  a  statesman 
at  all.  He  was,  to  be  sure,  interested  in  poli- 
tics. The  conditions  of  his  time  and  his  own 
social  position  made  that  inevitable.  But  his 
interest  was  that  of  the  seer  rather  than  that  of 
the  man  of  affairs.  In  him  the  idealist  com- 
pletely overshadowed  the  practical  administra- 
tor. At  bottom  he  was  a  religious  teacher.  And 
the  burden  of  his  message  was  the  doctrine  of 
faith.  He  applied  this  doctrine  most  clearly  to 
the  political  conditions  of  his  time.  But  it  was 
by  no  means  simply  a  political  principle  with 
him.  It  was  a  profound  personal  experience, 
the  mainspring  of  his  life.  When  adverse  con- 
ditions, for  instance,  confronted  him,  when  he 
154 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

felt  that  he  was  accomplishing  little  or  nothing, 
he  turned  his  face  upward  and  said,  "I  will  wait 
for  Jehovah,  that  hideth  his  face  from  the  house 
of  Jacob,  and  I  will  look  for  him"  (8.  17). 

But  faith  with  Isaiah  took  on  a  more  definite 
form  than  has  thus  far  been  indicated.  It  led 
him  on  at  least  two  occasions  to  assert  that  Je- 
rusalem would  not  be  captured  by  the  enemy 
then  threatening  it.  These  two  occasions  were 
the  Syro-Ephraimitic  war  (B.  C.  734)  and  the 
invasion  of  Sennacherib  (B.  C.  701  or  690). 
In  both  of  these  instances  the  enemy  was  acting 
in  defiance  of  the  will  of  Jehovah,  and  hence 
Jerusalem  was  safe.  Some  hold  that  the  prophet 
did  not  confine  his  teaching  on  this  point  to  any 
specific  occasions,  but  that  he  made  of  the  in- 
violability of  Jerusalem  a  "dogma."  This,  how- 
ever, is  inconsistent  with  a  number  of  utterances 
in  which  he  predicts  the  complete  destruction  of 
the  city  (32.  14;  22.  14;  3.  26;  5.  5!;  6.  nf.). 
Then,  too,  it  is  inherently  improbable  that  the 
man  who  believed  that  the  glory  of  Jehovah 
filled  the  whole  earth,  and  that  his  government 
was  righteous  and  impartial,  would  hold  to  the 
inviolable  sacredness  of  any  place  regardless 
of  the  character  of  its  inhabitants.  He  might 
assert  with  perfect  confidence  that  under  cer- 
tain circumstances  Jerusalem  would  not  be  cap- 
tured, and  he  might  see  in  Zion  a  symbol  of  the 

155 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

eternal  kingdom  of  God  (28.  16;  8.  18),  but 
he  would  hardly  make  the  ability  of  the  city  to 
resist  all  foreign  attacks  a  vital  question  of 
faith.  This  was  a  later  misconstruction  of  his 
teaching,  and  not  a  part  of  his  own  message. 

Another  definite  expression  of  Isaiah's  faith 
is  to  be  found  in  his  doctrine  of  the  remnant 
(4.  2f.;  7.  3;  10.  20ff.;  11.  16;  28.  5;  37.  31). 
The  idea  of  a  remnant  who  would  be  saved  out 
of  the  impending  doom  was  not  new  with 
Isaiah.  It  appears  in  Amos  (5.  14L ),  and  also 
in  the  account  of  Elijah  in  First  Kings  (19.  18). 
It  was  evidently  a  familiar  idea  in  the  time  of 
Isaiah.  Otherwise  he  would  not  have  embodied 
it  in  the  symbolical  name  given  to  his  older  son 
(7.  3).  "A-remnant-shall-return"  would  have 
meant  nothing  to  the  people,  if  the  conception 
had  been  an  altogether  new  one.  Hence  Isaiah 
did  not  originate  the  idea  of  the  salvation  of  a 
remnant,  but  he  made  it  more  prominent  than 
the  preceding  prophets  had  done.  In  and  of  it- 
self the  idea  has  a  double  significance:  it  im- 
plies that  a  remnant,  and  only  a  remnant,  will  be 
saved.  There  is  thus  an  element  of  doom  in  it. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  implies  that  the  whole  na- 
tion is  not  to  be  destroyed.  Some  will  return 
to  Jehovah  and  be  preserved.  There  is,  accord- 
ingly, in  it  also  an  element  of  hope.  And  this 
is  the  idea  usually  associated  with  it  (10.  2off. ). 
156 


ISAJAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

We  have  then  in  this  conception  of  the  remnant 
the  connecting  link  between  the  prophetic  mes- 
sage of  doom  and  that  of  hope.  In  the  impend- 
ing judgment  a  few  will  be  saved,  and  they  will 
become  the  holy  seed  from  which  a  new  nation 
or  community  will  grow. 

The  Messianic  prophecies  in  Isaiah,  like  those  ' 
in  Amos  and  Hosea,  are  rejected  by  some  critics. 
But  the  reasons  given  for  their  rejection  lose 
their  force  as  soon  as  it  is  recognized  that  the 
Messianic  hope  did  not  originate  with  Isaiah  or 
any  of  the  other  literary  prophets.  It  was  cur- 
rent in  Israel  long  before  their  time  and  as- 
sumed a  great  variety  of  forms.  What  the 
literary  prophets  did  was  to  take  this  traditional 
material,  purge  it  of  its  heathen  elements,  and 
give  to  it  a  distinctly  ethical  character.  They 
did  not,  however,  wholly  recast  it.  Some  of  the 
older  forms  were  retained.  Hence,  we  should 
not  be  surprised  if  the  representations  which 
any  particular  prophet  gives  of  the  future  are 
not  all  of  one  and  the  same  piece  and  do  not 
harmonize  perfectly  with  his  other  utterances. 
More  or  less  of  diversity  under  the  circumstances 
is  to  be  expected.  And  so  it  is  in  Isaiah.  In 
some  of  his  Messianic  prophecies  the  personal 
Messiah  is  in  the  foreground;  in  others  he  does 
not  appear  at  all.     In  some  it  is  a  religious  com- 

157 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

munity  that  seems  to  be  in  the  prophet's  mind; 
in  others  it  is  an  organized  state  with  judges 
and  counselors.  In  some  a  miraculous  transfor- 
mation of  nature  is  apparently  expected;  in 
|  others  a  more  natural  advent  of  the  new  order. 
It  is  evident  from  this  that  Isaiah  had  no  inde- 
pendent and  final  conception  of  the  new  and 
transformed  Israel.  One  aspect  of  the  tradi- 
tional hope  now  appealed  to  him,  and  now  an- 
other. And  as  each  came  he  gave  it  poetic  ex- 
pression. The  divergent  details  were  to  him 
matters  of  indifference.  The  only  essential 
thing  was  the  conviction  that  Jehovah  through 
the  faithful  in  Israel  would  work  out  his  own 
righteous  and  beneficent  purpose  in  the  world. 

Some  of  Isaiah's  prophecies  of  the  future,  as 
stated  above,  represent  Israel  as  a  religious  com- 
munity. These  may  be  connected  with  8.  16-18, 
where  we  read  of  a  band  of  disciples  that  gath- 
ered about  the  prophet.  It  is  natural  for  us  to 
see  in  this  band  the  nucleus  of  the  remnant  that 
was  to  be  saved  in  the  impending  judgment. 
W.  Robertson  Smith  sees  in  it  also  "the  birth 
of  the  conception  of  the  church,  the  first  step  in 
the  emancipation  of  spiritual  religion  from  the 
forms  of  political  life."  Whether  this  be  cor- 
rect or  not,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  Isaiah, 
like  Hosea,  had  the  ideal  conception  of  the 
Church  of  God.  His  own  band  of  disciples 
158 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

would  naturally  suggest  it,  and  so  also  would 
his  own  antimilitary  policy.  There  is,  then,  no 
reason  why  he  may  not  in  some  exalted  moment 
have  attributed  to  the  purified  and  redeemed 
people  of  Israel  such  a  mission  as  we  find  in 
2.  2-4,  one  of  the  sublimest  passages  of  all 
Scripture.  "The  mountain  of  Jehovah's  house," 
he  says,  "shall  be  established  at  the  head  of  the 
mountains,  and  shall  be  exalted  above  the  hills; 
and  all  nations  shall  flow  unto  it.  And  many 
peoples  shall  go  and  say,  Come  ye,  and  let  us 
go  up  to  the  mountain  of  Jehovah,  to  the  house 
of  the  God  of  Jacob;  and  he  will  teach  us  of 
his  ways,  and  we  will  walk  in  his  paths :  for  out 
of  Zion  shall  go  forth  the  law,  and  the  word  of 
Jehovah  from  Jerusalem.  And  he  will  judge 
between  the  nations,  and  will  decide  concerning 
many  peoples;  and  they  shall  beat  their  swords 
into  plowshares,  and  their  spears  into  pruning- 
hooks;  nation  shall  not  lift  up  sword  against 
nation,  neither  shall  they  learn  war  any  more." 
In  general  harmony  with  this  picture  is  also  that 
in  4.  2-6,  according  to  which  everyone  that  is 
left  in  Zion  is  to  be  called  holy,  and  the  striking 
characteristic  of  the  redeemed  city  is  to  be  the 
presence  of  Jehovah,  the  Shekinah. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  have  in  1.  26  a  quite 
different  representation.     The  restored  city,  to 
be  sure,  is  to  be  a  city  of  righteousness,  a  faith- 
159 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

ful  city.  But  the  ideal  here  presented  is  polit- 
ical and  consists  in  the  restoration  of  the  best 
days  of  the  past.  Jehovah  after  purging  the 
city  is  to  restore  her  "judges  as  at  the  first" 
and  her  "counselors  as  at  the  beginning."  In 
general  harmony  with  this  conception  are  the 
later  pictures  of  an  ideal  king  of  the  Davidic 
line  in  9.  2-j;  11.  1-9;  and  32.  1-5.  Only  this 
king  is  to  far  surpass  any  king  of  the  past.  He 
is  to  be  endowed  in  a  unique  degree  with  the 
Spirit  of  Jehovah,  the  spirit  of  wisdom  and  of 
might.  He  is  to  be  called  Wonderful  Coun- 
selor, God-like  Hero,  Everlasting  Father,  Prince 
of  Peace.  He  is  to  break  the  rod  of  the  op- 
pressor, extend  the  dominion  of  David,  and 
introduce  a  reign  of  perfect  righteousness  and 
endless  peace.  Even  the  animal  world  is  to  share 
in  this  transformation.  The  wild  beasts  are  to 
lose  their  predatory  instincts,  and  all  animate 
beings  are  to  live  in  peace  and  harmony. 

In  connection  with  these  passages  there  is  one 
in  chapter  7,  which  has  awakened  much  discus- 
sion and  calls  for  special  attention  (verses 
14-17).  This  is  the  famous  Immanuel  proph- 
ecy :  "Behold,  a  virgin  shall  conceive,  and  bear 
a  son,  and  shall  call  his  name  Immanuel"  (verse 
14).  So  the  English  version  reads.  As  is  well 
known,  this  prophecy  is  applied  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament (Matt.  1.  23)  to  the  birth  of  Jesus.  But 
160 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

it  is  now  generally  conceded  that,  while  this  ap- 
plication was  perfectly  legitimate  from  the  New 
Testament  point  of  view,  it  did  not  express  the 
strict  historical  meaning  of  the  passage.  The  He- 
brew word  rendered  "virgin"  might  also  be  trans- 
lated "young  wife."  The  idea  of  virginity  is  not 
necessarily  implied  in  it.  It  simply  designates 
a  young  woman  of  marriageable  age.  Then, 
too,  the  context  makes  it  evident  that  an  event 
in  the  near  future  is  referred  to,  and  not  one 
that  took  place  seven  hundred  years  later.  But 
with  this  limitation  the  meaning  is  still  far  from 
clear.  The  interpretation  which  is  at  present 
perhaps  the  most  widely  accepted  ascribes  no  spe- 
cial significance  to  the  child  Immanuel.  The 
name  means  "God-is-with-us,"  and  might  be 
given  to  any  child  born  at  the  time  of  some 
national  victory  or  of  some  special  good  for- 
tune. In  this  instance  the  supposed  occa- 
sion of  the  giving  of  the  name  is  the  with- 
drawal of  the  enemies  of  Judah,  Pekah  and 
Rezin,  from  Jerusalem.  This  event  will  take 
place  within  nine  months,  for  the  young 
woman  who  is  to  be  the  mother  of  Immanuel  is 
already  with  child.  Verse  16  then  adds  that 
two  or  three  years  later  the  land  of  Pekah  and 
Rezin  itself  will  be  devastated.  In  harmony 
with  this,  8.  4  is  interpreted  as  meaning  that  still 
sooner,  within  a  year,  that  is,  three  months  after 
161 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

the  birth  of  Immanuel,  the  two  northern  cap- 
itals, Samaria  and  Damascus,  will  be  captured. 
But  to  attribute  to  Isaiah  such  a  definite  chrono- 
logical scheme  is  to  be  untrue  to  the  fluid  and 
poetic  character  of  his  mind  and  to  the  broad 
perspective  of  prophecy  in  general.  Further- 
more, the  interpretation  just  given  of  7.  14 
makes  it  necessary  either  to  eliminate  verses  15 
and  17  or  to  hold  that  the  sign  given  Ahaz  was 
a  double  one,  verses  14  and  16  promising  speedy 
relief  from  the  northern  kings,  and  verses  15 
and  17  predicting  that  Judah  herself  would  be 
subjected  to  a  severe  chastisement  shortly  after 
the  fall  of  the  two  northern  kingdoms.  The 
latter,  however,  unduly  complicates  the  sign,  and 
the  former  is  in  itself  improbable.  The  cur- 
rent interpretation  of  the  passage  is,  therefore, 
to  be  rejected. 

It  is  my  opinion  that  the  clause  "whose  two 
kings  thou  abhorrest,"  in  verse  16,  is  a  later 
scribal  addition  and  that  the  key  to  the  rest 
of  the  passage  is  to  be  found  in  Amos  3.  2  and 
5.  18.  Just  as  there  was  in  the  eighth  century 
before  Christ  a  popular  belief  in  the  election  of 
Israel  and  in  the  "day  of  Jehovah,"  so  there  was 
a  popular  belief  in  the  coming  of  a  Messiah. 
According  to  this  popular  belief,  some  well- 
known  young  woman,  a  young  wife,  or  perhaps 
a  virgin,  was  to  bear  a  son,  who  was  to  be  called 
162 


ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  FAITH 

Immanuel,  and  who  as  a  mere  child  was  to 
deliver  Israel  from  her  enemies.  What  Isaiah, 
then,  says  in  7.  14  is  that  this  remarkable  child 
is  soon  to  be  born.  The  Messianic  era  is  about 
to  dawn.  But  instead  of  bringing  deliverance  to 
the  people,  its  coming  will  be  marked  by  deso- 
lation and  ruin.  The  expected  Messiah  will  as 
a  child  be  compelled  to  eat  the  food  of  priva- 
tion (verse  15),  and  the  whole  land  will  be 
devastated  (verses  16,  17).  Just,  then,  as  Amos 
took  the  popular  belief  in  the  election  of  Israel 
and  in  the  day  of  Jehovah  and  turned  them 
against  the  people,  asserting  that  the  election 
of  Israel  meant  that  they  would  all  the  more 
certainly  be  punished  for  their  sins,  and  declar- 
ing that  the  day  of  Jehovah  would  be  a  day  of 
darkness,  not  of  light,  so  Isaiah  took  the  popu- 
lar belief  in  a  Messiah  and  turned  it  against 
Ahaz  and  his  followers.  Immanuel,  he  said, 
would  indeed  come,  and  more  speedily  than 
they  expected,  but  his  coming  would  be  at- 
tended by  a  terrible  national  misfortune  in- 
stead of  the  reverse.  Just  as  Amos,  how- 
ever, did  not  altogether  reject  the  popular  belief 
in  the  election  of  Israel  and  in  the  day  of  Jeho- 
vah, but  gave  to  them  a  new  moral  significance, 
so  Isaiah  did  not  completely  repudiate  the  pop- 
ular Messianic  faith,  but  gave  to  it  a  higher  eth- 
ical interpretation.  The  Messianic  dawn,  he  de- 
163 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

clared,  would  mean  to  Ahaz  and  the  unbelieving 
nation  ruin,  but  to  the  faithful  remnant  it  would 
mean  the  reign  of  an  ideal  King  in  endless  peace 
and  perfect  righteousness.  Immanuel  to  them 
would  be  the  true  Messiah. 

Isaiah,  in  the  light  of  this,  was  not  the  creator 
of  the  Messianic  hope  but  its  critic.  He  took 
the  traditional  belief,  purged  it  of  its  selfish 
nationalism,  and  made  it  the  vehicle  of  a  lofty 
idealism.  Here  it  is  that  the  real  significance  of 
his  visions  of  the  future  is  to  be  found.  They 
reveal  a  clear,  strong,  and  unwavering  faith  in 
the  ideal  and  eternal  kingdom  of  righteousness. 
The  particular  forms  under  which  he  conceived 
this  kingdom,  noble  as  they  are,  were  not  final. 
God  had  yet  greater  things  in  store  for  the  ages 
to  come.  But  the  underlying  principle  of  faith 
itself  has  not  been  superseded.  Time  and  change 
have  had  no  aging  effect  upon  it.  It  remains  as 
much  as  ever  the  basis  and  very  essence  of  true 
religion.  "It  doth  not  yet  appear  what  we  shall 
be"  (i  John  3.  2),  but,  with  Isaiah,  we  still 
look  for  "a  city  which  hath  foundations,  whose 
builder  and  maker  is  God"  (Heb.  11.  10). 


164 


CHAPTER  V 

JEREMIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL 
PIETY 

"The  prophetic  ideas,"  says  A.  B.  Davidson, 
"form  but  half  of  the  teaching  of  the  prophets; 
the  greater  half  lies  in  their  own  life  and  per- 
sonal relation  to  God."  This  statement  is  pre- 
eminently true  as  applied  to  Jeremiah.  The  most 
significant  thing  about  him  is  not  his  public 
message  to  Israel,  but  his  own  personal  religious 
life.  As  we  read  his  book,  what  interests  and 
impresses  us  is  not  so  much  the  objective  pro- 
phetic word  itself  as  it  is  its  effect  upon  himself 
and  upon  his  relation  to  God  and  his  fellowmen. 
It  is  the  reaction  of  his  own  nature  upon  his 
prophetic  office  and  upon  his  total  environment 
that  forms  the  most  instructive  feature  of  his 
ministry.  No  doubt  the  earlier  prophets  many 
of  them  had  had  experiences  similar  to  those  of 
Jeremiah.  But  they  had  not  yet  become  intro- 
spective, had  not  learned  to  analyze  their  own 
mental  states,  had  not  yet  formed  the  habit  of 
reflecting  upon  their  own  personal  experiences. 
Their  thought  was  objective;  they  lost  them- 
selves in  their  message.  Not  so,  however,  Jere- 
165 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

miah.  He  was  by  nature  a  psychologist.  What 
interested  him  was  the  things  of  the  heart.  It 
was  impossible  for  him  completely  to  submerge 
himself  in  his  mission  to  the  nation.  However 
engrossing  his  public  tasks  were,  he  could  not 
overlook  the  fact  that  as  a  prophet  he  stood  in 
an  intimate  personal  relation  to  God,  and  that 
this  relationship  was  a  matter  of  vital  religious 
concern.  The  supreme  thing  in  his  thought  was 
still  the  nation  and  its  fate,  but  along  with  this 
went  the  irrepressible  problem  of  his  own  per- 
sonal experiences.  The  ways  of  God  in  them, 
as  well  as  in  the  life  of  the  nation,  called  for  ex- 
planation. 

Jeremiah  was  the  first  prophet  to  raise  this 
question.  In  him  personal  religion  came  to  self- 
consciousness.  It  is  this  fact  that  gives  to  him 
his  unique  significance  in  the  history  of  religion. 
The  earlier  prophets  had  laid  down  the  essential 
principles  of  religion,  had  made  religion  a  mat- 
ter of  ethics,  of  holy  love,  and  of  moral  faith, 
and  had  no  doubt  exemplified  these  qualities  in 
their  own  private  life.  But  they  did  not  ap- 
parently look  upon  their  own  experience  of 
religion  as  sufficiently  important  to  be  worthy 
of  a  place  in  their  recorded  utterances.  Re- 
ligion with  them  seems  to  have  been  primarily 
a  national  affair.  It  was  Jeremiah  who  first 
gave  to  it  the  personal  note.  It  was  he  who  first 
166 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

made  the  soul  of  the  individual  the  true  seat  of 
religion.  But  this  does  not  mean  that  he  gave 
up  the  national  point  of  view.  Through  all  his 
ministry  he  continued  to  address  himself  to  the 
nation  as  such.  It  simply  means  that  he  made 
the  conception  of  religion  deeper  and  more  in- 
ward. He  made  its  essential  nature  consist  in 
personal  fellowship  with  God.  This  implies  the 
ascription  of  new  importance  to  the  individual. 
It  also  implies  that  true  religion  is  not  a  matter 
of  race,  but  is  as  broad  as  humanity  itself.  But 
Jeremiah  does  not  especially  concern  himself 
with  these  implications.  He  leaves  them  to  be 
worked  out  by  his  two  great  successors.  What 
he  is  himself  especially  interested  in  is  the  actual, 
vital  experience  of  God.  And  this  he  finds  in 
himself,  in  his  own  soul.  He,  as  Duhm  says, 
"first  discovered  the  soul  and  its  significance  for 
religion." 

It  is  here  that  Jeremiah's  chief  contribution 
to  the  development  of  religion  is  to  be  found. 
And  this  contribution,  it  is  to  be  borne  in  mind, 
was  not  merely  formal  in  character.  It  was  not 
merely  a  new  idea  let  loose  among  men.  It  was 
a  new  spiritual  force,  backed  up  and  made  vital 
by  a  great  personality.  For  Jeremiah  not  only  "7 
gave  verbal  expression  to  the  idea  that  true  piety 
consists  in  the  fellowship  of  the  individual  soul 
with  God.  He  illustrated  it  in  his  own  life, 
167 


iS 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

and  testified  his  loyal  adherence  to  it  by  a  long 
ministry  of  strife,  suffering,  and  martyrdom.J 
What  he  then  gave  to  his  people  was  not  simply 
a  new  and  deeper  conception  of  religion,  but  a 
noble  and  inspiring  example.  Some  scholars 
have  seen  in  Isaiah  53  a  picture  of  him  and  his 
sufferings.  This  is  probably  incorrect.  But  it 
is  still  true  that  there  is  in  the  whole  history 
of  prophecy  no  figure  that  has  had  such  power 
of  appeal  to  the  human  heart  as  that  of  Jeremiah. 
He  does  not,  to  be  sure,  compare  with  Isaiah  in 
strength,  in  brilliancy,  in  literary  power,  and  in 
majesty  of  conception;  but  in  depth  of  feeling, 
in  insight  into  human  nature,  in  the  power  of 
sympathy,  and  in  the  grasp  of  those  truths  of 
religion  which  most  completely  meet  the  com- 
mon needs  of  men,  he  far  surpasses  him.  In 
these  regards  he  comes  nearer  than  any  other 
Old  Testament  prophet  to  the  Christian  stand- 
point, and  in  this  sense  might  be  called  the  great- 
est of  the  prophets.  In  any  case,  he  stands  sec- 
ond only  to  Isaiah. 

With  reference  to  Jeremiah's  life  we  are  for- 
tunately better  informed  than  with  reference  to 
that  of  any  other  prophet.  This  is  due  partly 
to  his  singular  habit  of  self-revelation,  and  partly 
to  the  fact  that  he  had  a  Boswell.  His  scribe 
Baruch,  who  was  with  him  in  Jerusalem 
(32.  12)  and  who  accompanied  him  to  Egypt 
168 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

(43.  4-7),  seems  to  have  written  a  biography  of 
his  master,  which  was  freely  used  in  the  com- 
pilation of  the  present  book  of  Jeremiah. 

The  prophetic  call  came  to  Jeremiah  in  B.  C. 
626,  the  thirteenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Josiah. 
He  was  then  a  young  man,  so  that  he  must  have 
been  born  about  B.  C.  650.  His  home  was  in 
Anathoth,  a  town  three  miles  northeast  of  Jeru- 
salem. He  came  from  a  priestly  family  and  so 
had  probably  been  trained  in  the  things  of  God 
from  childhood.  Nevertheless,  when  he  received 
the  prophetic  call  he  shrank  from  it  and 
pleaded  his  youth  as  a  ground  of  his  inability 
to  undertake  so  important  a  task  (1.  6).  His 
reluctance  at  this  point  suggests,  by  way  of  con- 
trast, the  readiness  of  Isaiah.  When  Jehovah 
said,  "Whom  shall  I  send,  and  who  will  go  for 
us?"  Isaiah  replied  with  confidence,  "Here  am 
I ;  send  me."  This  difference  between  the  two 
men  does  not  argue  a  greater  degree  of  piety 
or  consecration  on  the  part  of  either,  but  simply 
points  to  a  difference  of  temperament.  Isaiah 
was  strong,  self-reliant,  equal  to  any  emergency. 
Jeremiah,  on  the  other  hand,  was  by  nature 
weak,  timid,  distrustful  of  his  own  powers.  But 
this  did  not  unfit  him  for  the  prophetic  office. 
"There  are,"  says  Paul,  "diversities  of  gifts, 
but  the  same  spirit."  God  is  able  to  use  the  most 
varied  natures  in  his  work.  Indeed,  the  very 
169 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

weakness  of  Jeremiah  made  it  possible  for  God 
to  exhibit  in  him  the  special  effects  of  the  Spirit's 
presence  in  a  way  that  could  not  have  been  done 
in  a  stronger  man.  Hence,  we  have  in  Jeremiah 
that  remarkable  contrast  of  nature  which  makes 
his  prophetic  career  at  once  so  human  and  so  di- 
vine. "As  man  he  melts  in  tears  and  pines  away 
in  sympathy;  as  the  bearer  of  God's  word  he 
is  firm  and  hard  like  pillar  and  wall,  on  which 
the  storm  of  a  nation's  wrath  breaks  in  vain" 
(Orelli). 

There  are  two  other  points  that  should  also 
be  mentioned  in  connection  with  the  call  of 
Jeremiah.  First,  he  was  predestined  for  the' 
prophetic  office  from  his  birth  (i.  5).  This  is 
a  great  conviction  for  anyone  to  have,  but  it 
was  especially  significant  in  the  time  of  Jere- 
miah. Before  his  day  it  was  chiefly  the  nation 
whose  destiny  was  thought  of  as  directed  by 
Jehovah.  Little  was  said  of  the  individual.  Ac- 
cordingly, it  must  have  been  a  very  impressive 
thought  when  it  was  first  brought  home  to  the 
mind  of  Jeremiah  that  even  while  in  his  mother's 
womb  Jehovah  had  set  him  aside  for  his  life- 
work.  The  full  import  of  the  idea  probably 
never  dawned  upon  him,  nor  was  he  able  always 
to  live  up  to  it.  But  in  so  far  as  he  understood 
it  and  made  it  his  own,  it  solved  for  him  the 
problem  of  life.  Secondly,  it  should  be  observed 
170 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

that  Jeremiah  was  called  to  be  a  prophet  not 
only  to  Judah  but  to  the  nations  (i.  5,  10). 
This  does  not  mean  that  he  was  to  go  as  a  mis- 
sionary to  other  nations.  His  ministry  was  con- 
fined to  the  chosen  people  quite  as  much  as  was 
that  of  Amos,  Hosea,  and  Isaiah.  But  the  pro- 
phetic outlook  was  never  limited  to  Israel 
(28.  8).  The  fate  of  Israel  involved  that  of 
other  nations.  This  was  so  in  the  time  of  Amos 
and  Isaiah,  and  it  was  especially  the  case  in  the 
time  of  Jeremiah.  For  in  his  time  Judah  had 
been  for  a  century  or  more  a  vassal  of  Assyria. 
During  this  period  her  history  had  been  simply 
an  episode  in  the  history  of  the  world.  It  was 
then  inevitable  that  a  prophet  to  Judah  at  this 
time  should  be  a  prophet  to  the  nations.  More- 
over, it  should  not  be  forgotten  that  there  was 
a  super-historical,  eschatological  element  in  the 
teaching  of  the  prophets.  They  dealt  not  simply 
with  impending  events  of  a  national  or  inter- 
national character,  but  with  finalities,  and  final- 
ities that  involved  not  only  Israel  but  the  whole 
world.  This  is  especially  clear  in  the  case  of 
Zephaniah,  whose  prophecy  just  preceded  the 
call  of  Jeremiah.  Zephaniah  depicts  in  vivid 
terms  the  approaching  day  of  Jehovah,  a  day 
that  means  doom  not  only  for  the  people  of  Je- 
rusalem but  for  all  mankind.  In  Jeremiah  this 
eschatological  outlook  is  not  so  prominent,  but 
171 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

it  is  by  no  means  lacking.  And  in  its  light  it  is 
still  further  evident  why  his  commission  em- 
braced not  only  Israel  but  the  nations. 

Jeremiah's  ministry,  which  began  in  B.  C.  626, 
extended  beyond  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  in  B.  C. 
586.  This  closing  period  of  Judah's  history  was 
an  eventful  one  both  without  and  within  the 
little  kingdom.  The  year  of  Jeremiah's  pro- 
phetic call  witnessed  the  death  of  the  last  of  the 
great  kings  of  Assyria.  Shortly  before  this,  As- 
syria had  conquered  Egypt  and  attained  its 
greatest  extension  of  power.  But  after  the  death 
of  Ashurbanipal  it  rapidly  declined,  and  in  B.  C. 
606  its  proud  city  Nineveh  fell.  This  sudden 
decline  of  Assyria  was  due  in  part  to  an  invasion 
of  the  Scythians,  who,  According  to  Herodotus, 
terrorized  southwestern  Asia  for  twenty-eight 
years — from  B.  C.  640  to  612.  It  was  not  they, 
hoAvever,  but  the  new  Chaldean  kingdom  that 
fell  heir  to  what  was  left  of  the  Assyrian  em- 
pire at  the  time  of  its  overthrow.  For  a  while 
there  was  a  question  as  to  whether  Syria  and 
Palestine  would  fall  to  Egypt  or  Babylonia. 
The  Egyptian  king  Necho  had  in  B.  C.  608 
taken  possession  of  the  territory  and  was  pre- 
pared to  assert  his  claim  to  it.  But  in  605  he 
met  Nebuchadrezzar  at  the  great  battle  of  Car- 
chemish  and  was  decisively  defeated.  This  gave 
Syria  and  Palestine  to  the  new  Babylonian  em- 
172 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

pi  re,    in   whose   power  they    remained  until   the 
capture  of  Babylon  in  B.  C.  538. 

The  prophet  Nahum  welcomed  the  approach- 
ing fall  of  Nineveh  with  an  exultant  song  of 
doom.  But  events  failed  to  justify  his  exulta- 
tion. The  decline  of  Assyria  meant  eventually 
for  Judah  simply  a  change  of  masters.  Under 
Josiah  a  period  of  independence  seems  to  have 
been  enjoyed,  but  it  was  cut  short  by  his  sudden 
and  tragic  death  on  the  field  of  Megiddo.  He 
had  rashly  attempted  to  stay  the  eastward  ad- 
vance of  Necho,  and  as  a  result  his  own  king- 
dom became  a  tributary  to  Egypt.  His  younger 
son  Jehoahaz,  who  was  proclaimed  king  by  the 
people,  was  three  months  later  carried  away  as 
a  captive,  never  to  return,  and  in  his  stead  an 
older  son,  Jehoiakim,  ascended  the  throne  as 
a  vassal  of  Necho.  This  subjection  to  Egypt 
continued  until  the  battle  of  Carchemish  in  B.  C. 
605,  after  which  there  was  apparently  another 
brief  period  of  independence.  At  least  Jehoia- 
kim seems  not  to  have  paid  tribute  to  Nebucha- 
drezzar until  four  or  five  years  later  (2  Kings 
24.  1).  He  himself  would  probably  have  been 
quite  willing  to  continue  in  a  tributary  relation- 
ship, but  the  people,  who  had  so  recently  tasted 
the  joys  of  freedom  and  were,  furthermore,  in- 
flamed by  religious  fanaticism,  were  not  disposed 
to  brook  again  a  foreign  yoke.     So  in  B.  C.  597, 

173 


the  beacon  lights  of  prophecy 

after  paying  tribute  three  years,  they  revolted. 
Before  the  Babylonian  army  could  reach  Jeru- 
salem Jehoiakim  died,  and  was  succeeded  by 
his  son  Jehoiachin.  Jehoiachin  after  a  reign  of 
three  months  surrendered  to  Nebuchadrezzar, 
and  was  carried  as  a  captive  to  Babylon  along 
with  the  flower  of  the  nation.  After  such  a 
catastrophe  it  might  natural  be  supposed  that 
the  spirit  of  the  people  would  have  been  broken. 
But  it  did  not  so  turn  out.  The  same  passionate, 
fanatical  longing  for  independence  asserted  it- 
self under  the  new  king  Zedekiah,  and  finally 
led  to  another  revolt  which  resulted  in  the  cap- 
ture and  destruction  of  Jerusalem  in  B.  C.  586. 
Such  were  the  troublous  times  in  which  Jere- 
miah lived — times  that  tried  men's  souls.  Let 
us  now  trace  the  prophet's  own  fortunes  through 
them.  His  ministry  may  naturally  be  divided 
into  three  periods,  that  under  Josiah  (B.  C.  626- 
608),  that  under  Jehoiakim  (B.  C.  608-597), 
and  that  under  Zedekiah  (B.  C.  597-586).  The 
reign  of  Josiah  was  a  comparatively  quiet  one. 
When  Jeremiah  began  his  prophetic  ministry 
there  was  imminent  danger  that  the  country 
would  be  overrun  by  the  dreaded  Scythians. 
Jeremiah  himself  confidently  expected  and  pre- 
dicted it  (5.  i5ff. ;  6.  22ff.).  Indeed,  it  was 
this  danger  that  apparently  gave  such  urgency 
to  his  earlier  discourses  as  they  are  preserved 
174 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

for  us  in  the  so-called  Scythian  Songs  of  chap- 
ters two  to  six.  But  in  spite  of  the  prophet's 
predictions  this  particular  peril  failed  to  ma- 
terialize. The  Scythians,  as  they  moved  south- 
ward toward  Egypt  in  B.  C.  623-622,  left  Judah 
unmolested.  As  this  apparently  contradicted 
the  plain  words  of  the  young  prophet,  one  natu- 
rally wonders  what  effect  it  had  upon  him. 
Some  think  the  failure  of  his  prediction  to  come 
true  was  a  severe  blow  both  to  him  personally 
and  to  his  standing  as  a  prophet.  In  this  way 
they  account  for  the  fact,  that  he  was  not  con- 
sulted in  connection  with  the  new  Law-book 
discovered  in  B.  C.  621,  and  for  the  further 
fact,  that  for  a  number  of  years  subsequently, 
from  B.  C.  621  to  608,  we  apparently  have  no 
prophecies  from  him.  He  was,  it  is  thought, 
discredited  in  the  eyes  of  others  and  struck 
dumb  by  the  contradiction  which  his  preaching 
had  received.  But  it  is  very  doubtful  if  this 
was  the  case.  It  is  quite  possible  to  account  for 
his  long  silence,  and  also  for  his  failure  to  be 
consulted  with  reference  to  the  newly  found 
book  of  the  Law  on  other  grounds.  At  the  time 
the  book  of  the  law  was  found  he  may  have 
been  absent  from  the  city,  and  hence  the  proph- 
etess Hulda  was  consulted  instead.  Then,  again, 
he  may  have  looked  upon  the  Deuteronomic  re- 
form as  temporarily  at  least  averting  the  doom 
i75 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

he  had  pronounced  upon  the  nation,  and  hence 
may  have  waited  in  silence  through  the  rest  of 
Josiah's  reign  to  see  what  its  actual  effect  upon 
the  people  would  be.  Or  it  may  be  that  after 
the  Scythian  storm  had  blown  over,  a  period 
of  comparative  quiet  set  in,  which  gave  the 
prophet  no  occasion  for  any  special  message  of 
alarm.  In  any  case,  we  find  that  after  the  death 
of  Josiah  he  resumed  his  prophetic  activity,  and 
in  B.  C.  604  reproduced  and  published  his  ear- 
lier Scythian  discourses  without  any  apparent 
feeling  that  they  had  been  contradicted  by  the 
course  of  events.  Indeed,  the  very  fact  of  their 
publication  at  this  later  date  implies  the  direct 
contrary.  Evidently,  Jeremiah  distinguished 
between  the  incidental  and  the  essential  elements 
in  his  message.  His  original  prophecy  of  doom 
had  not  been  fulfilled  by  the  Scythians,  as  he 
had  expected.  But  this  was  a  minor  matter. 
There  was  an  essential  truth  in  the  prophecy, 
and  now,  he  says  in  B.  C.  604,  it  will  be  ful- 
filled by  the  Babylonians.  It  is  hardly  probable, 
then,  that  the  failure  of  the  Scythians  to  overrun 
the  land  of  Judah  affected  at  all  seriously  either 
Jeremiah  himself  or  his  prophetic  standing. 

Jeremiah's    relation,    however,    to    the    Deu- 
teronomic    reform,    which    was    the    great    out- 
standing event  of  Josiah's  reign,  calls  for  fur- 
ther consideration.     On  this  point  there  is  wide 
176 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

diversity  of  opinion  among  scholars.  Some  take 
their  cue  from  Jer.  II.  1-14,  and  hold  that  Jere- 
miah not  only  did  not  oppose  but  actively  sup- 
ported the  Deuteronomic  program.  Others  find 
the  key  to  the  question  in  Jer.  8.  8,  and  conclude 
that  he  was  hostile  to  the  whole  movement,  at- 
tributing the  new  law  to  "the  false  pen  of  the 
scribes"  which  "hath  wrought  falsely."  But 
both  of  these  views  are  extreme.  It  is  incredi- 
ble that  Jeremiah  should  have  characterized  the 
Deuteronomic  law  as  "false."  Jer.  8.  8  must 
refer  to  some  scribal  expansion  or  perversion 
of  the  law.  For  with  a  large  part  of  Deuteron- 
omy Jeremiah  was  manifestly  in  accord.  He 
could  not  help  but  sympathize  with  its  passion- 
ate devotion  to  Jehovah  and  its  tender  regard 
for  the  poor  and  the  needy.  In  two  instances 
also  he  seems  to  refer  approvingly  to  its  regula- 
tions (11.  iff.;  34.  I3ff.).  Then,  too,  he  could 
hardly  have  spoken  in  such  warm  terms  of  ap- 
preciation of  Josiah  (22.  15,  16),  if  he  had 
regarded  the  king's  most  important  administra- 
tive act  as  due  to  the  "false  pen  of  the  scribes." 
On  the  other  hand,  it  is  highly  improbable 
that  Jeremiah  ever  gave  to  the  Deuteronomic 
law  his  unqualified  approval.  There  was  much 
that  was  good  in  it,  and  this  he  indorsed ;  but 
no  legislative  reform  could  meet  the  demands 
of  the  situation.  What  was  needed  was  a  rad- 
177 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

ical  change  of  heart  (4.  3,  4).  Nothing  short 
of  this  could  avert  the  impending  doom.  In 
Deuteronomy  there  is  also  a  stress  on  ritual 
which  seems  hardly  in  harmony  with  the  teach- 
ing of  Jeremiah.  He  took  the  same  attitude 
toward  the  cultus  as  his  great  predecessors  of 
the  eighth  century.  "To  what  purpose,"  he 
says,  as  the  spokesman  of  Jehovah,  "cometh 
there  to  me  frankincense  from  Sheba,  and  the 
sweet  cane  from  a  far  country?  Your  burnt 
offerings  are  not  acceptable,  nor  your  sacrifices 
pleasing  unto  me"  (6.  20).  And  again:  "Add 
your  burnt  offerings  unto  your  sacrifices,  and 
eat  ye  flesh !  For  I  spake  not  unto  your  fathers, 
nor  commanded  them  in  the  day  that  I  brought 
them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  concerning 
burnt  offerings  or  sacrifices"  (7.  21  f. ).  Such 
statements  as  these  manifestly  represent  a  dif- 
ferent standpoint  from  that  of  Deuteronomy. 
Furthermore,  it  soon  became  clear  that  the  Deu- 
teronomic  centralization  of  worship,  desirable 
as  it  no  doubt  was  from  some  points  of  view, 
carried  with  it  its  own  peril.  It  gradually  led  to 
a  superstitious  trust  in  the  temple.  In  hours  of 
danger  the  people  would  crowd  into  its  courts, 
crying,  "The  temple  of  Jehovah,  the  temple  of 
Jehovah,  the  temple  of  Jehovah,  are  these" 
(7.  4),  as  though  Jehovah  must  needs  protect  / 
those  in  his  temple  regardless  of  their  character. 
178 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

They  made,  said  the  prophet,  of  the  house  of 
Jehovah  a  den  of  robbers,  to  which  they  would 
flee  for  safety  whenever  their  own  sins  brought 
them  into  danger  ( 7.  1 1 ) .  In  view  of  such  ten- 
dencies to  externalism  in  the  Deuteronomic  re- 
form, it  is  not  likely  that  Jeremiah  was  ever 
fully  satisfied  with  it.  "It  was  good  in  its  way," 
as  A.  B.  Davidson  says,  "but  it  was  not  the 
good  which  he  and  men  like  him  desired  to  see 
and  required."  Some  scholars  consequently  re- 
gard Jer.  11.  i-i4asa  later  addition  to  the  book, 
and  others  think  the  prophet  was  here  speaking, 
not  of  the  Deuteronomic,  but  the  Sinaitic  cove- 
nant. The  most  probable  view  is  that  the  pas- 
sage refers  to  Deuteronomy,  but  that  it  has  been 
to  some  extent  worked  over  by  later  hands  so 
as  to  imply  on  the  prophet's  part  a  more  com- 
plete indorsement  of  the  Deuteronomic  reform 
than  was  originally  intended. 

The  second  period  of  Jeremiah's  ministry  be- 
gan with  the  death  of  Josiah  and  the  accession 
of  Jekoiakim.  The  latter  was  a  very  different 
type  of  man  from  his  father.  He  lacked  reli- 
gious interest  and  had  no  proper  appreciation 
of  the  duties  of  a  king.  Whether  or  not  his  ex- 
ample was  responsible  for  it,  we  have  at  the  be- 
ginning of  his  reign  a  recrudescence  of  heathen- 
ism and  immorality.  It  was  apparently  this 
fact,  together  with  the  new  disturbances  in  the 
179 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

political  world,  that  stirred  the  prophet  again  to 
action.  First  came  the  twice- reported  temple- 
discourse  (chapters  7  and  26),  in  which  he  pre- 
dicted that  the  temple  would  be  destroyed  like 
Shiloh  of  old.  This  prediction  struck  the  priests 
and  prophets  as  nothing  short  of  blasphemous. 
They,  therefore,  brought  capital  charges  against 
him.  But  some  of  the  elders  recalled  that  a 
similar  prediction  had  been  made  by  the  prophet 
Micah  a  century  earlier,  and  that  he  had  been 
treated  very  differently  by  Hezekiah  the  king. 
Then,  too,  Jeremiah  had  the  powerful  support 
°f  Ahikam,  the  son  of  Shaphan,  so  that  he  es- 
caped with  his  life.  But  how  real  the  danger 
was  is  clear  from  the  fact  that  a  like-minded 
prophet,  Uriah,  was  put  to  death  by  the  king 
because  he  had  delivered  a  similar  message  of 
doom  against  the  city  and  the  land  (26.  20-23). 
This  experience,  however,  did  not  intimidate 
Jeremiah.  A  year  or  two  later — the  exact  date 
is  not  known — he  repeated  his  offense  by  declar- 
ing again  in  the  temple  court  that  the  city  would 
be  destroyed  (19.  1  to  20.  6).  This  time  he 
was  scourged  and  put  in  the  stocks  over  night 
by  Pashhur,  "the  chief  officer  in  the  house  of 
Jehovah."  Undismayed  by  such  treatment,  he 
boldly  announced  to  Pashhur  that  he  and  his 
whole  house  would  go  into  captivity.  As  a 
penalty  probably  for  this  act  of  defiance,  he  was 
180 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

denied  the  privilege  of  admission  to  the  temple 
court  (36.  5).  He,  therefore,  resolutely  deter- 
mined to  reach  the  ear  of  the  people  by  the 
written  word.  So  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoia- 
kim,  he  dictated  to  his  scribe  Baruch  all  the 
prophecies  he  had  delivered  up  to  that  time,  and 
commissioned  him  to  read  them  to  the  people  at 
the  next  public  fast,  when  it  might  be  supposed 
they  would  be  in  a  serious  frame  of  mind  (chap- 
ter 36).  This  event  awakened  great  interest. 
Baruch  was  required  to  read  the  prophecies  a 
second  time  before  a  company  of  princes,  and 
then  the  roll  was  taken  to  the  king.  He  cut  it  up, 
three  or  four  columns  at  a  time,  as  it  was  read 
to  him  and  threw  it  into  the  fire;  after  which 
he  ordered  the  arrest  of  Jeremiah  and  Baruch. 
"But  Jehovah,"  we  read,  "hid  them"  (36.  26). 
A  new  copy  of  the  prophecies  was  then  pre- 
pared, containing  not  only  all  the  words  in  the 
previous  roll  but  also  in  addition  "many  like 
words,"  among  them  a  terrible  woe  upon  Jehoia- 
kim  himself  (22.  13-19). 

How  long  Jeremiah  remained  in  concealment 
we  do  not  know.  Some  think  it  was  through  all 
the  rest  of  Jehoiakim's  reign.  It  has  even  been 
suggested  that  he  left  the  country  and  did  not 
return  until  the  king's  death.  But  there  is  no- 
where any  indication  of  this,  and  it  is  probable 
that  after  a  while  the  king's  wrath  cooled  off. 
181 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

Anyhow,  there  are  a  number  of  incidents  in  the 
prophet's  life  which  may  naturally  be  referred 
to  the  latter  part  of  Jehoiakim's  reign,  such  as 
the  plot  against  his  life  by  his  own  townsmen 
(n.  18-21),  and  the  attempts  to  entrap  him  in 
his  speech  (18.  i8f. ;  20.  10). 

The  third  period  in  the  prophet's  ministry 
covered  the  reign  of  Zedekiah  (B.  C.  597-586). 
The  best  part  of  the  nation  had  now  been  car- 
ried into  captivity.  They  were  the  good  figs ; 
those  at  home  were  the  bad  figs  (chapter  24). 
Still,  even  among  the  captives  in  Babylon  false 
hopes  were  entertained.  Jeremiah  consequently 
wrote  them  a  letter,  bidding  them  prepare  for  a 
long  captivity  (chapter  29).  In  Jerusalem,  he 
steadily  opposed  the  spirit  of  rebellion,  counsel- 
ing submission  to  Babylon.  This  brought  him 
in  B.  C.  594  into  conflict  with  the  false  prophet 
Hananiah  (chapters  27,  28).  Hananiah  prophe- 
sied that  in  two  years  the  yoke  of  Nebuchadrez- 
zar would  be  broken  from  off  the  neck  of  all 
the  nations.  This  prophecy  Jeremiah  denounced 
as  false,  and,  as  a  penalty  for  uttering  it,  declared 
that  Hananiah  would  die  within  a  year — a  pre- 
diction that  was  fulfilled  two  months  later. 
When  the  final  rebellion  came,  in  B.  C.  587, 
Jeremiah's  attitude  toward  it  was  still  the  same. 
Time  and  again  he  declared  that  the  one  way  of 
safety  was  to  submit  to  the  Babylonian  king 
182 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

(21.  i-io;  38.  2,  18).  If  they  failed  to  do  this, 
certain  destruction  awaited  the  city  (37.  3-10; 
38.  21-23).  Such  speech  naturally  awakened 
the  hostility  of  the  war  party.  As  a  result,  Jere- 
miah was  arrested  on  a  false  charge  of  desert- 
ing to  the  enemy  and  put  into  prison.  Trans- 
ferred from  the  house  of  Jonathan,  where  he 
was  first  confined,  to  the  court  of  the  guard,  he 
continued  his  counsel  of  submission  to  the  peo- 
ple who  came  to  see  him.  This  so  angered  the 
nobles  that  they  thrust  him  into  a  slimy  cistern, 
where  he  would  soon  have  died  had  he  not  been 
rescued  by  Ebed-melek,  the  Ethiopian.  Re- 
stored again  to  the  court  of  the  guard,  he  re- 
mained there  till  the  capture  of  the  city.  After 
its  fall  he  threw  in  his  lot  with  Gedaliah,  the 
son  of  Ahikam,  and  settled  at  the  new  capital, 
Mizpah,  where  he  continued  to  live  until  the 
new  governor  was  assassinated.  After  this,  in 
spite  of  his  opposition,  he  was  carried  into  Egypt 
by  his  frightened  countrymen.  There  he  re- 
newed his  denunciation  of  them  for  their  idol- 
atry, and  finally,  tradition  says,  met  his  death 
at  their  hands.  So  to  the  end  he  remained, 
against  his  will,  a  man  of  strife. 

With  this  survey  of  the  life  and  times  of  Jere- 
miah in  mind,  we  pass  now  to  a  more  intimate 
and  more  systematic  study  of  his  teaching. 
183 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

The  book  of  Jeremiah  is  the  longest  of  the 
prophetic  books  and  one  of  the  most  poorly  ar- 
ranged. It  is  also  the  only  one  that  gives  an 
account  of  its  origin.  In  chapter  36,  as  we  have 
already  seen,  we  are  told  how  Jeremiah  in  the 
twenty-second  year  of  his  ministry  dictated  to 
Baruch  all  the  prophecies  he  had  delivered  up 
to  that  time.  This  roll  was  destroyed  by  the 
king  the  next  year,  and  then  another  was  pre- 
pared containing  in  addition  "many  like  words." 
At  subsequent  times  other  additions  were  no 
doubt  made  by  the  prophet  (30.  1,  2),  so  that 
the  book  grew  up  without  any  definite  plan. 
The  later  scribes  rearranged  the  material  and 
added  not  a  little  from  Baruch's  memoirs  and 
other  sources.  As  at  present  arranged,  the  book 
may  be  divided  into  four  unequal  divisions. 
Chapters  1  to  25  contain  prophetic  discourses 
chiefly  in  the  first  person.  Chapters  26  to  45 
are  made  up  for  the  most  part  of  the  remi- 
niscences of  Baruch.  Chapters  46  to  51  are  a 
group  of  oracles  against  the  heathen,  and  chap- 
ter 52  is  an  historical  appendix  taken  largely 
from  Second  Kings.  There  is  considerable  dif- 
ference of  opinion  as  to  how  extensive  the  later 
scribal  additions  to  the  book  were.  Of  the  ap- 
proximately one  thousand  three  hundred  and 
fifty  verses,  Duhm  attributes  only  about  two 
hundred  and  eighty  to  Jeremiah,  two  hundred 
184 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

and  twenty  to  Baruch,  and  the  remaining  eight 
hundred  and  fifty  to  later  editors.  This,  how- 
ever, is  a  very  extreme  view,  and  rests  upon  the 
unwarranted  assumption  that  Jeremiah  wrote 
only  poetry,  and  poetry  of  one  definite  measure. 
Most  scholars  assign  very  much  less  to  later 
hands.  But  that  considerable  additions  to  the 
book  were  made  in  later  times  is  generally  ad- 
mitted; and  this  fact  must  be  borne  in  mind 
in  any  critical  estimate  of  the  prophet's  teaching. 

As  we  read  the  book  of  Jeremiah,  we  are  first  j 
of  all  impressed,   as  we  were  in  our  study  of 
Amos,  Hosea,  and  Isaiah,  with  the  prominence 
of  the  message  of  doom.     Jeremiah's  commis-      ( 
sion  at  the  outset  was  "to  pluck  up  and  to  break      I 
down,   to  destroy  and  to  overthrow"    (i.    10).      *> 
And    to    this    commission    he     remained     true 
throughout  his  whole  ministry.     Even  after  the 
predicted  doom  had   fallen  upon  the  nation,  he 
continued    his    denunciation    of    the    exiles    in 
Egypt,  as  though  he  believed  in  a  kind  of  pun- 
ishment after  death   (chapter  44).     It  was,  he 
declared,   characteristic   of  the  true   prophet   to 
prophesy   "of  war,   and   of  evil,   and   of  pesti- 
lence"   (28.   8).      By   this   he   meant   that    true 
prophecy  was  moral  in  its  character  and  must 
therefore  manifest  itself  in  the  condemnation  of 
a    wicked    people.      Indeed,    this    very    attitude 
toward  Israel  on  the  part  of  a  prophet  attested 

185 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

the  truth  of  his  message.  It  was  only  prophecies 
of  peace  to  a  sinful  nation  that  required  verifi- 
cation by  the  event  (28.  9). 

At  first  it  was  the  Scythians  who  were  to 
bring  destruction  upon  Judah,  later  the  Babylo- 
nians. But  Jeremiah  did  not  reckon  simply  with 
historical  forces.  The  real  agent  in  the  punish- 
ment of  Judah  was  Jehovah,  and  it  was  possible 
I  for  him  to  execute  his  will  in  a  great  variety  of 
ways.  In  one  of  the  most  powerful  passages  of 
the  whole  book,  Jeremiah  represents  the  ap- 
proaching desolation  as  a  return  to  the  state  of 
chaos : 

I  beheld  the  earth,  and,  lo, 

It  was  waste  and  void; 

And  the  heavens,  and  they  had  no  light 

I  beheld  the  mountains,  and,  lo, 

They  trembled, 

And  all  the  hills  moved  to  and  fro. 

I  beheld,  and,  lo, 

There  was  no  man, 

And  all  the  birds  of  the  heaven  were  fled. 

I  beheld,  and,  lo, 

The  fruitful  field  was  a  wilderness, 

And  all  the  cities  were  broken  down  at  the  presence  of 
Jehovah   (4.  23-26). 

In  another  brief  but  masterful  poem  he  depicts 
the  coming  doom  as  due  to  pestilence. 
186 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

Death  is  come  up  into  our  windows, 
It  is  entered  into  our  palaces ; 
To  cut  off  the  children  from  without, 
The  young  men  from  the  streets. 

The  corpses  of  men  shall  fall 
Upon  the  open  field, 
As  sheaves  after  the  harvestman, 
And  none  shall  gather  them  (9.  21  f.). 

In  another  case  he  represents  the  people  as  sud- 
denly overtaken  by  a  storm  which  enshrouds 
them  in  darkness. 

Give  glory  to  Jehovah  your  God, 

Before  he  cause  darkness, 

And  before  your  feet  stumble  upon  the  dark  mountains, 

And,  while  ye  look  for  light, 

He  turn  it  into  the  shadow  of  death 

And  make  it  gross  darkness  (13.  16). 

"Only  a  master  of  the  first  rank,"  says  Duhm, 
"could  select  just  this  moment  before  the  storm, 
and  in  two  lines  [in  the  Hebrew]  perfectly  de- 
pict it  and  then — stop."  But  these  are  only 
illustrations  of  the  great  variety  of  forms  under 
which  Jeremiah  describes  the  approaching  doom. 
The  historical  situation  he  has  in  mind  is  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  at  the  hands  of  a  for- 
eign foe.  But  attached  to  this  idea,  and  supple- 
menting it,  are  many  other  ideas  of  doom, 
among  them  the  conception,  more  or  less  definite, 
of  an  approaching  world- judgment,  a  marvelous 
187 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

event  or  series  of  events,  which  is  to  inaugurate 
a  new  era  in  the  history  of  the  world  (chapters 
25,  and  46  to  51). 

"The  ground  of  Jeremiah's  message  of  doom 
was  essentially  the  same  as  that  of  the  earlier 
prophets.  Social  and  moral  conditions  had  not 
changed  much  since  the  close  of  the  eighth  cen- 
tury. It  happens  that  Jeremiah  does  not  lay  so 
much  stress  on  the  injustice  and  oppression  of 
the  rich  as  did  Amos  and  Isaiah,  nor  does  he 
dwell  on  the  unchastity  of  the  people  the  way 
Hosea  did.  But  his  condemnation  of  the  general 
«..  wickedness  of  his  day  is  very  similar  to  theirs. 
"The  sin  of  Judah,"  he  says,  "is  written  with  a 
pen  of  iron,  and  with  the  point  of  a  diamond 
it  is  graven  upon  the  tablet  of  their  heart" 
(17.  1).  The  particular  evil  he  emphasizes 
is  that  of  deceit  (5.  iff.;  9.  2ff.).  Per- 
haps his  own  transparent  sincerity  of  soul 
made  this  sin  especially  offensive  to  him.  Re- 
ligiously the  Deuteronomic  reform  effected  a 
marked  outward  change.  Before  it  was  in- 
troduced, conditions  seem  to  have  been  even 
worse  than  a  century  earlier.  During  the 
reactionary  reign  of  Manasseh,  new  evils 
had  grown  up,  such  as  the  worship  of  the  host 
of  heaven;  and  old  evils,  such  as  human  sacri- 
fice, had  been  revived  (2.  Kings  21.  6).  This 
state  of  affairs   is  clearly   reflected  in  the  dis- 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

courses  from  the  earliest  part  of  Jeremiah's  min- 
istry (chapters  2  to  6).  The  current  religious 
evils  are  there  denounced  in  terms  very  similar 
to  those  found  in  Hosea.  The  reform  of  B.  C. 
621  put  an  end  to  many  of  these  evils.  But  in 
their  stead  there  arose  a  new  type  of  formalism, 
a  superstitious  trust  in  the  temple  (chapter  7), 
and  also  a  self-confident  nationalism  disguising 
itself  in  the  cloak  of  piety  (chapter  28).  The 
real  inner  attitude  of  the  people,  therefore, 
toward  Jehovah  was  not  seriously  altered  by  the 
Deuteronomic  reform,  and  after  the  death  of 
Josiah  some  at  least  of  the  earlier  heathen  prac- 
tices were  revived  (7.  31 ;  13.  27).  It  is  evident, 
then,  that  there  was  abundant  ground  for  the 
prophet's  message  of  doom. 

Hosea  and  Isaiah  had  traced  the  sin  of  Israel 
back  to  a  deeper  principle,  Hosea  finding  it  in 
disloyalty  to  Jehovah  and  Isaiah  in  unbelief.  In 
Jeremiah  it  is  not  so  much  any  one  principle  that 
is  the  source  of  sin  as  it  is  the  heart  itself.  Man 
is  not,  according  to  Jeremiah,  by  nature  sinful. 
He  is  made  for  God.  What  instinct  is  to  the 
birds  of  passage  that  religion  is  to  man  (8.  7). 
It  is  the  deepest  impulse  of  his  being.  What 
Tertullian  meant  when  he  said  that  the  human 
heart  is  naturally  Christian  was  already  clearly 
apprehended  by  Jeremiah.  That  Israel  should 
forget  Jehovah  seemed  to  him  a  thing  contrary 
189 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

to  the  order  of  nature  (2.  32;  18.  141.)-  But 
while  the  native  bent  of  the  human  mind  is  thus 
toward  God,  man  is  naturally  weak  and  is  easily 
led  astray.  As  he  persists  in  sin,  he  develops  a 
love  for  it  and  cherishes  it  (5.  31 ;  14.  10).  He 
does  not  generate  evil  out  of  his  own  nature  as 
a  well  casts  forth  water,  but  he  harbors  it  just 
as  a  cistern  keeps  fresh  and  cool  the  water  that 
has  come  into  it  from  without  (6.  7).  And  so 
gradually  his  heart  becomes  diseased  (17.  9). 
It  takes  on  a  stubbornness  foreign  to  its  original 
constitution  (7.  24;  9.  14;  23.  17),  until  eventu- 
ally sin  becomes  a  kind  of  second  nature  to  man, 
which  he  can  no  more  change  than  an  Ethiopian 
can  his  skin  or  a  leopard  his  spots  (13.  23). 

Such  was  the  condition  of  the  people  of  Israel 
as  Jeremiah  found  them.  If  they  were  to  meet 
the  demands  of  Jehovah,  they  must  manifestly 
undergo  a  radical  change  of  character.  Hence, 
the  prophet  says:  "Break  up  your  fallow 
ground,  and  sow  not  among  thorns.  Circumcise 
yourselves  to  Jehovah,  and  take  away  the  fore- 
skins of  your  heart"  (4.  3,  4).  This  was  not  an 
act  that  lay  within  their  own  power.  "I  know," 
says  the  prophet,  "that  the  way  of  man  is  not 
in  himself;  it  is  not  in  man  that  walketh  to 
direct  his  steps"  (10.  23).  But  the  help  of  Je- 
hovah was  always  near.  He  stood  in  an  espe- 
cially close  relationship  to  the  soul  of  man.  In- 
190 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

deed,  it  was  his  peculiar  function  to  try  the  heart 
and  the  mind  (ii.  20;  17.  10;  20.  12).  He 
was  ever  ready  to  heal  the  backslidings  of  his 
wayward  children  (3.  22).  The  prophet,  there- 
fore, in  his  eager  desire  for  their  conversion, 
could  at  times  almost  hear  the  penitent  people 
on  the  bare  heights,  weeping  and  making  sup- 
plication unto  Jehovah,  saying,  "Behold,  we 
are  come  unto  thee;  for  thou  art  Jehovah  our 
God"  (3.  21  f. ).  Even  exiled  Ephraim  he  could 
hear  in  spirit  bemoaning  himself  as  a  prodigal 
and  saying  unto  Jehovah:  "Turn  thou  me, 
and  I  shall  be  turned"  (31.  i8f.).  But  these 
ardent  hopes  were  not  destined  to  be  realized  by 
the  prophet.  The  people  refused  the  help  of- 
fered. They  would  not  take  of  the  balm  of 
Gilead  (8.  22).  They  persisted  in  their  stub- 
bornness of  heart,  and  so  went  down  into  ruin. 
In  view  of  these  facts  it  was  inevitable  that 
Jeremiah's  message  should  be  one  mainly  of 
doom.  But  it  was  by  no  means  merely  this.  It 
had  also  its  element  of  hope.  At  the  beginning 
of  his  ministry  the  prophet  had  not  only  received 
the  commission  "to  destroy  and  to  overthrow," 
but  also  "to  build  and  to  plant."  By  his  pro- 
found conception  of  sin  and  clear  insight  into 
the  need  of  regeneration,  which  we  have  just 
been  considering,  he  was,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
building  and  planting  better  than  he  knew.  But 
191 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

it  is  not  to  building  and  planting  of  this  kind 
that  his  commission  refers.  It  refers  to  nations 
and  kingdoms,  and  especially  to  the  kingdom  of 
Israel.  The  destruction  of  Jerusalem  was  far 
from  being  the  last  word  of  the  prophet. 
Throughout  his  whole  ministry  he  entertained 
the  hope  of  the  restoration  of  the  exiled  people. 
Now  and  then,  as  we  have  seen,  he  apparently 
cherished  the  idea  that  Judah  would  repent  and 
escape  exile  altogether.  But  this  was  only  a 
temporary  expectation  in  which  the  wish  was 
father  to  the  thought.  For  him,  as  a  rule,  the 
exile  of  Judah  was  certain.  But  just  as  certain 
was  her  restoration  from  exile  after  a  period  of 
seventy  years  (25.  12;  29.  10).  And  not  only 
was  Judah  to  be  restored,  but  also  Ephraim 
(31.  4-6).  An  interesting  practical  expression 
of  the  prophet's  faith  in  the  future  of  the  land 
was  furnished  while  he  was  confined  in  the  court 
of  the  guard  during  ithe  siege  of  the  city  by  the 
Babylonians  (32.  6-15).  A  cousin  came  and 
asked  him  to  buy  a  field  in  Anathoth,  which  was 
at  that  time  probably  occupied  by  the  enemy. 
Jeremiah  at  once  saw  in  this  request  an  indica- 
tion of  the  gracious  purpose  of  Jehovah,  and  so 
bought  the  field.  "For  thus  saith  Jehovah  of 
hosts,  the  God  of  Israel :  Houses  and  fields  and 
vineyards  shall  yet  again  be  bought  in  this  land" 

(32.  IS). 

192 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

In  his  conception  of  the  future,  Jeremiah 
shared  the  common  view  of  the  prophets  that 
there  was  to  be  a  marvelous  interposition  of  Je- 
hovah resulting  in  the  establishment  of  a  new 
order  (chapters  30  to  33).  But  in  his  represen- 
tation of  this  new  order,  two  new  and  significant 
elements  are  introduced.  The  first  relates  to  the 
Davidic  king.  He  is  to  bear  the  name,  "Jehovah 
our  righteousness"  (23.  5,  6).  This  means  not 
only  that  he  is  to  be  a  righteous  king,  but  also 
that  he  is  to  be  a  moral  and  spiritual  redeemer 
of  his  people.  Through  him  Jehovah  is  to  make 
his  people  righteous.  We  have  here  an  antici- 
pation of  the  righteous  servant  of  Isaiah  53, 
who  is  to  "justify  many."  The  second  new 
element  is  found  in  the  conception  of  a  new 
covenant  between  Jehovah  and  his  people 
(31.  31-34).  "This  is  the  covenant  that  I  will 
make  with  the  house  of  Israel  after  those  days, 
saith  Jehovah :  I  will  put  my  law  in  their  inward 
parts,  and  in  their  heart  will  I  write  it.  .  .  .  And 
they  shall  teach  no  more  every  man  his  neigh- 
bor, and  every  man  his  brother,  saying,  Know 
Jehovah ;  for  they  shall  all  know  me,  from  the 
least  of  them  unto  the  greatest  of  them,  saith 
Jehovah."  This  is  one  of  the  profoundest  and 
most  significant  utterances  in  the  whole  Old 
Testament.  It  contains  the  quintessence  of  the 
whole   theology    of   Jeremiah.      Henceforth,    in 

193 


S 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

the  new  covenant,  the  law  is  to  be  inwardly  and 
individually  appropriated.  Religion,  in  a  word, 
is  to  be  a  matter  of  the  heart.  And  if  so,  it  can 
recognize  no  limits  of  race.  It  must  be  as  broad 
as  humanity  itself.  It  is,  then,  no  surprise  to 
find  Jeremiah  representing  the  nations  as  com- 
ing from  the  ends  of  the  earth  and  saying,  "Our 
fathers  have  inherited  naught  but  lies,  even  van- 
ity and  things  wherein  there  is  no  profit.  Shall 
a  man  make  unto  himself  gods,  which  yet  are  no 
gods?"  (16.  19,  20).  It  is  also  no  surprise  to 
find  him  enunciating  the  doctrine  of  individual- 
ism, which  is  the  correlate  of  universalism.  In 
the  better  days  to  come,  the  children  of  Israel, 
he  declares,  will  no  more  say,  "The  fathers  have 
eaten  sour  grapes,  and  the  children's  teeth  are 
set  on  edge.  But  every  one  shall  die  for  his  own 
iniquity:  every  man  that  eateth  sour  grapes,  his 
teeth  shall  be  set  on  edge"  (31.  20T).  These 
ideas,  however,  he  did  not  himself  elaborate 
and  insist  upon.  The  execution  of  this  task  he 
left  to  those  who  came  after  him.  It  is  his 
distinction  to  occupy  the  middle  point  in  the  his- 
tory of  prophecy.  The  great  truths  of  reli- 
gion, uttered  by  Amos,  Hosea,  and  Isaiah, 
came  to  a  focus  in  him  by  being  made  inward 
and  personal.  He  then,  in  turn,  by  his  con- 
ception of  the  inwardness  of  religion,  became 
the  starting  point  of  a  new  development,  lead- 
194 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

ing  ,to   the    individualism    of    Ezekiel    and    the 
universalism  of  Deutero-Isaiah.j 

But  the  most  interesting  aspect  of  Jeremiah's 
teaching  remains  yet  to  be  considered.  This 
is  found  in  the  revelations  he  has  given  us  of 
his  own  feelings  and  inward  experiences.  The 
message  of  doom,  which  he  was  commissioned 
to  deliver,  was  by  no  means  one  that  gave  him 
any  pleasure.  At  times  he  seems  to  have  been 
completely  overwhelmed  by  it.  Especially  was 
this  true  in  the  earlier  part  of  his  ministry.  He 
cries  out,  for  instance,  in  4.  19-21  : 

My  anguish,  my  anguish ! 

I  am  pained  at  my  very  heart ; 

My  heart  is  tumultuous  within  me, 

I  cannot  hold  my  peace ; 

Because  my  soul  hath  heard  the  sound  of  the  trumpet, 

The  alarm  of  war. 

Destruction   succeeds   destruction, 
For  the  whole  land  is  laid  waste: 
Suddenly  are  my  tents  destroyed, 
And  my  curtains  in  a  moment. 
How  long  shall  I  see  the  standard, 
And  hear  the  voice  of  the  trumpet? 

And  again  in  8.  18  and  9.  1 : 

Incurable  is  my  sorrow, 

My  heart  is  faint  within  me.  .  .  . 

Oh  that  my  head  were  waters, 

And  mine  eyes  a  fountain  of  tears, 

That  I  might  weep  day  and  night 

For  the  slain  of  the  daughter  of  my  people. 

195 

/ 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

But  not  only  did  his  message  of  doom  cause 
his  own  soul  intense  sorrow.  It  awakened  oppo- 
sition on  the  part  of  his  fellow  men  generally, 
and  estranged  them  from  him.  This  added  new 
bitterness  to  his  experience,  for  he  was  himself 
by  nature  social.  He  loved  the  society  of  others. 
He  looked  with  pleasure  upon  the  natural  joys 
of  life.  The  children  in  the  street  and  the  young 
men  in  the  market  place  were  to  him  special 
objects  of  sympathy  and  interest  (6.  u;  9.  21). 
Time  and  again  he  speaks  of  "the  voice  of  mirth 
and  the  voice  of  gladness,  the  voice  of  the  bride- 
groom and  the  voice  of  the  bride"  (7.  34;  16.  9; 
25.  10;  33.  11).  But,  however  much  his  own 
nature  was  drawn  toward  these  joyful  aspects 
of  life,  he  was  not  permitted  to  share  in  them. 
"I  sat  not,"  he  says  to  Jehovah,  "in  the  assem- 
bly of  them  that  make  merry,  nor  rejoiced ;  I 
sat  alone  because  of  thy  hand;  for  thou  hast 
filled  me  with  indignation"  (15.  17).  It  was 
probably  for  the  same  reason  also  that  he  was 
denied  the  comforts  of  a  home  (16.  2).  Con- 
sequently, he  felt  himself  cut  ofT  from  his  fel- 
low men,  condemned  to  isolation. 

But  not  only  did  men  treat  him  with  coldness. 
They  were  openly  hostile  to  him  and  sought  to 
accomplish  his  ruin.  Some  of  the  more  serious 
experiences  that  came  to  him,  as  a  result  of  this 
hostility,  have  already  been  spoken  of.  Here  we 
196 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

need  mention  only  the  efforts  to  entrap  him  in 
his  speech  (18.  i8f. ;  20.  10),  and  the  general 
persecution  and  reproach  that  he  suffered 
(20.  71. ;  15.  15).  Apart  altogether  from  the 
danger  involved  in  the  hostile  attitude  of  the 
people  about  him,  it  was  almost  intolerable  to  a 
man  of  his  sensitive  nature  to  live  in  such  an 
unfriendly  atmosphere.  Some  one  has  said  that 
observation  without  sympathy  is  torture.  And 
so  it  was  with  Jeremiah.  He  felt  that  he  was 
under  the  constant  surveillance  of  hostile  eyes, 
and  this  caused  him  the  keenest  distress.  Then, 
too,  he  was  by  nature  a  man  of  peace  (4.  10; 
6.  14;  8.  11;  14.  13;  23.  17;  29.  7).  Strife  ran 
contrary  to  the  grain  of  his  being.  Because  of 
this  it  was  a  perpetual  source  of  pain  to  him  to 
be  involved  in  conflict  with  those  about  him. 
Now  and  then  he  seems  to  have  been  able  to 
rise  above  his  troubles  and  take  them  less  seri- 
ously. For  instance,  he  says,  on  one  occasion, 
with  a  trace  of  humor:  "I  have  not  lent,  neither 
have  men  lent  to  me ;  yet  every  one  of  them  doth 
curse  me"  (15.  10).  But,  as  a  rule,  his  own 
sufferings  weighed  heavily  upon  him.  "Woe  is 
me,  my  mother,"  he  cries,  "that  thou  hast  borne 
me  a  man  of  strife  and  a  man  of  contention  to 
the  whole  earth"  (15.  10).  And  at  another  time, 
he  goes  so  far  as  to  curse  the  day  he  was  born 
(20.  14-18).  "Wherefore,"  he  says,  "came  I 
197 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

forth  out  of  the  womb  to  see  labor  and  sorrow, 
that  my  days  should  be  consumed  with  shame?" 
In  estimating  such  an  utterance  as  this,  it  is  to 
be  borne  in  mind  that  Jeremiah  did  not  have  the 
hope  of  a  life  hereafter  to  comfort  him,  nor  did 
he  have  the  consolation  of  the  belief  that  his 
own  suffering  might  be  vicarious  in  character, 
a  blessing  to  others.  His  misery  was  simply  a 
blind,  dumb  fact. 

It  was,  furthermore,  aggravated  by  two  con- 
siderations. First,  the  prophet  had  interceded 
for  the  people  with  Jehovah,  had  striven  to  turn 
away  his  wrath  from  them  (18.  20),  and  now 
they  reward  him  by  plotting  against  him  and 
persecuting  him.  This  was  so  manifestly  unjust 
that  it  rankled  in  his  soul  and  led  him  to  cry  out 
for  vengeance  upon  his  enemies  (15.  15).  Sec- 
ondly, he  had  been  called  to  the  prophetic  office 
by  Jehovah,  and  hence  felt  that  he  had  a  right 
to  expect  his  protection ;  but  instead  he  was 
exposed  to  constant  reproach  and  peril  of  life. 
Indeed,  the  more  faithfully  he  performed  his 
duties  as  a  prophet,  the  greater  was  the  danger 
and  suffering  he  incurred.  It  seemed  to  him, 
therefore,  at  times,  as  though  not  only  men  but 
God  himself  had  conspired  against  him. 

Under  these  circumstances,  it  naturally  oc- 
curred to  him  that  relief  might  be  secured  by 
ceasing  to  prophesy.  But  "if  I  say,  I  will  not 
198 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

make  mention  of  him,  nor  speak  any  more  in 
his  name,  then  there  is  in  my  heart  as  it  were  a 
burning  fire  shut  up  in  my  bones,  and  I  am 
weary  with  forbearing,  and  cannot  contain" 
(20.  9).  So,  with  persecution  from  without,  a 
burning  fire  within,  and  an  apparently  unsympa- 
thetic God  above,  he  was  jostled  hither  and 
thither  until,  in  desperation,  he  cried  out:  "O 
Jehovah,  thou  hast  enticed  me,  and  I  was  en- 
ticed; thou  art  stronger  than  I,  and  hast  coerced 
me.  .  .  .  Why  is  my  pain  perpetual,  and  my 
wound  incurable,  which  refuseth  to  be  healed? 
wilt  thou  in  deed  be  unto  me  as  a  deceitful  brook, 
as  waters  that  fail?"  (20.  7;  15.  18).  Such  an 
outcry  was  natural  enough  under  the  circum- 
stances, but  it  was  far  from  what  one  would 
expect  from  a  prophet  of  the  Most  High.  And 
so  Jehovah  turns  to  him  and  says :  "If  thou 
wilt  return,  then  will  I  restore  thee,  that  thou 
may  est  stand  before  me;  and  if  thou  bring  forth 
the  precious  without  the  vile,  thou  mayest  be  as 
my  mouth"   (15.   19). 

This  is  one  of  the  most  remarkable  utterances 
in  the  whole  book.  Nowhere  else  do  we  get 
such  an  insight  into  the  heart  of  Jeremiah  and 
into  the  essence  of  his  teaching  as  here.  Jeho- 
vah, it  is  to  be  observed,  in  his  response  to  the 
prophet  says  nothing  about  his  sufferings.  He 
has  no  word  of  sympathy  for  him  in  his  trials. 
199 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

These,  he  assumes,  are  to  be  met  and  manfully 
borne.  On  the  other  hand,  he  regards  the 
prophet's  complaints  as  equivalent  to  apostasy. 
By  uttering  them  he  has  backslidden.  So  Jeho- 
vah here  offers  him  the  privilege  of  restoration 
to  his  prophetic  office.  The  condition  of  this 
restoration  is  simply  this,  that  he  bring  forth 
the  precious  without  the  vile.  The  vile  was  the 
prophet's  complaining,  with  all  that  it  implied ; 
the  precious  was  his  sense  of  fellowship  with 
God,  with  all  that  it  involved.  We  have  in  this 
utterance  of  Jehovah  the  prophet's  higher  na- 
ture asserting  itself.  In  his  best  moments  he 
realized  that  there  was  nothing  in  life  that  could 
compare  with  fellowship  with  God.  Whatever 
suffering  it  might  incidentally  entail,  it  was  still 
the  chief  good  of  life.  It  was  not  always  possi- 
ble for  him  to  keep  himself  up  to  this  high  pitch. 
The  lower  part  of  his  nature  not  infrequently 
broke  out  in  rebellion  against  what  seemed  his 
unjust  lot.  But  in  such  hours,  realizing  his 
need,  he  turned  his  face  upward  and  said :  "Heal 
me,  O  Jehovah,  and  I  shall  be  healed ;  save  me, 
and  I  shall  be  saved :  for  .  .  .  thou  art  my  refuge 
in  the  day  of  evil"  (17.  14,  17).  And  so 
through  prayer  he  found  rest  unto  his  soul 
(6.  16),  and  entered  into  peace,  that  peace  which 
the  world  could  not  give. 

In  this  experience  of  the  prophet  and  in  his 
200 


THE  PROPHET  OF  PERSONAL  PIETY 

conception  of  the  new  covenant,  we  have  the  high 
point  of  Old  Testament  prophecy.  Nowhere 
else  do  we  have  so  close  an  approach  to  the  New 
Testament  standard.  For  this  reason  it  is  not 
surprising  that  when,  six  centuries  later,  Jesus 
asked  whom  the  people  thought  him  to  be,  he 
was  told  that  some  said  he  was  Jeremiah  (Matt. 
1 6.  14)  ;  and  also  not  surprising  that  when  at 
the  Last  Supper  he  took  the  cup  and  passed  it 
to  his  disciples,  he  borrowed  a  term  from  Jere- 
miah and  called  it  "the  new  covenant"  in  his 
blood  (Luke  22.  20). 


201 


CHAPTER  VI 

EZEKIEL  THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

As  we  pass  from  the  book  of  Jeremiah  to  that 
of  Ezekiel  we  are  aware  of  a  marked  change. 
We  are  still  in  the  realm  of  prophetic  thought, 
but  it  is  no  longer  prophetic  thought  in  its  purity. 
A  new  element  entered  into  the  work  of  Eze- 
kiel. He  was  priest  as  well  as  prophet.  Not 
only  was  he  the  son  of  a  priest,  as  was  Jeremiah, 
but  by  training  and  native  endowment  he  had 
the  tastes  and  interests  of  a  priest  (4.  14).  In 
his  book,  therefore,  we  find  no  such  polemic 
against  ceremonialism  as  in  the  other  prophets 
whom  we  have  studied.  He  places  ritual  of- 
fenses alongside  of  the  moral  (22.  6-16),  and 
in  the  concluding  chapters  of  the  book  (40  to 
48)  gives  elaborate  instructions  with  reference 
to  the  construction  of  the  temple  and  the  exter- 
nals of  religion.  In  taking  this  attitude  toward 
rites  and  ceremonies,  Ezekiel  was  following  out 
a  line  of  development  already  begun  by  Deu- 
teronomy. It  was  his  conviction,  as  it  was  that 
of  the  authors  of  Deuteronomy,  that  the  best 
way  to  promote  the  interests  of  true  religion 
202 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

was  not  to  repudiate  the  sacrificial  cult  alto- 
gether, but  to  moralize  it  and  make  it  a  medium 
for  the  expression  of  religious  truth.  And  in 
this  conviction  he  was  justified  by  the  course  of 
history.  His  own  sketch  of  priestly  law  stimu- 
lated other  like  endeavors,  until  eventually  an 
elaborate  ritual  code  was  introduced  by  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah  and  made  the  law  of  the  land. 
It  is,  then,  proper  to  speak  of  him  as  "the  father 
of  Judaism." 

In  this  aspect  of  Ezekiel's  work  it  has  been 
customary  to  see  a  decline  from  the  heights  of 
earlier  prophetic  teaching.  And  in  the  abstract 
this  is  no  doubt  true.  Ritual,  in  and  of  itself,  is 
no  necessary  part  of  genuine  religion.  On  the 
contrary,  it  frequently  carries  with  it  much  that 
is  materialistic  and  unspi ritual.  But  over  against 
this,  it  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  there  are 
many  nonessential  things  in  religion  that  are 
essential  in  order  to  make  religion  effective  in 
the  world.  These  nonessentials  vary  from  age 
to  age.  But  they  exist  in  every  age.  And  it  is 
an  evidence  of  true  religious  statesmanship  to 
be  able  to  single  them  out  and  make  them  the 
efficient  means  of  religious  culture.  This  power 
and  insight  Ezekiel  possessed;  and  it  was  be- 
cause he  possessed  it,  and  because  his  work  was 
carried  on  by  other  men,  such  as  Ezra  and  Nehe- 
miah, that  Old  Testament  religion  was  made 
203 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

strong   enough   to   resist    the   encroachments   of 
Greek  naturalism. 

In  the  course  of  its  history  the  religion  of 
Israel  was  forced  to  face  two  great  crises.  The 
first  was  caused  by  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  in  B.  C. 
586.  This  disaster  threatened  the  popular  faith 
in  the  power  of  Jehovah.  Whenever  any  other 
ancient  nation  fell,  the  people,  as  Isaiah  says, 
threw  their  gods  to  the  moles  and  the  bats, 
thinking  they  had  been  conquered  by  superior 
deities.  And  this  would  have  taken  place  in 
Israel  also,  had  it  not  been  for  the  work  of  the 
prophets.  These  inspired  men,  before  the  fall 
of  the  nation,  moralized  and  universalized  the 
conception  of  Jehovah.  They  declared  it  was  he, 
and  not  his  enemies,  who  was  about  to  destroy 
the  city.  There  was  nothing,  then,  in  the  fall 
of  Jerusalem  that  needed  to  weaken  faith  in 
him;  rather  did  this  event  furnish  new  ground 
for  trust  in  him.  Thus  the  spiritually  minded 
in  Israel  reasoned,  and  in  this  way  it  came 
about  that  the  Israelitic  religion  survived  its  own 
nation's  downfall — the  only  instance  of  the 
kind  in  the  history  of  the  world.  The  sec- 
ond crisis  above  referred  to  was  brought 
about  by  the  disintegrating  influence  of  Greek 
culture.  After  the  conquests  of  Alexander  the 
spread  of  Hellenism  threatened'  to  dissolve  away 
everything  that  was  characteristic  of  Hebrew  be- 
204 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

lief.  Every  other  religion  in  southwestern  Asia 
succumbed  to  Greek  naturalism;  and  this  would 
in  all  probability  have  been  the  fate  of  Judaism 
had  it  not  been  for  the  impenetrable  armor  of 
legalism  in  which  Ezekiel  and  Ezra  had  encased 
it.  What  saved  Israelitic  religion  from  falling  a 
prey  to  Greek  thought  and  arms  was  the  fact 
that  it  had  been  crystallized  into  law  by  the 
priests,  and  so  had  been  rendered  "hard  as  steel 
and  strong  as  iron."  It  was,  then,  a  service  of 
the  utmost  importance  to  biblical  religion  that 
Ezekiel  performed  when,  toward  the  close  of  his 
life  (40.  1),  he  worked  out  a  new  priestly  con- 
stitution for  restored  Israel. 

But  it  is  not  the  priestly  side  of  Ezekiel's 
activity  in  which  we  are  at  present  primarily  in- 
terested. Our  special  subject  of  study  is  his 
work  as  a  prophet.  And  here  what  above  all 
else  distinguishes  him  from  the  rest  of  the 
prophets  is  his  doctrine  of  individualism.  We 
have  already  seen  that  Jeremiah  made  religion  a 
personal  matter,  an  affair  of  the  soul.  We  have 
also  seen  that  his  own  personal  experiences  as  a 
prophet  constituted  for  him  a  problem.  He 
raised  the  question  as  to  why  the  wicked  pros- 
per (12.  1),  and  struggled  with  God  in  an  effort 
to  harmonize  the  sufferings  and  persecution  to 
which  he  was  subject  with  his  own  lofty  calling. 
But  he  did  not  take  up  the  general  problem  of 
205 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

individualism.  It  lay  very  near  to  his  circle  of 
ideas  to  do  so,  but  the  conditions  under  which 
his  ministry  was  carried  on  led  him  to  pass  it 
by.  It  was  Ezekiel  who  first  asserted  the  rights 
of  the  individual.  In  so  doing  he  did  not  give 
up  the  old  message  of  national  doom.  He  re- 
affirmed it  again  and  again  down  to  the  very 
fall  of  Jerusalem.  But  in  the  impending  doom 
he  insisted  that  every  individual  would  be  judged 
by  his  own  moral  condition.  No  person  would 
be  punished  for  the  sins  of  his  father  or  for 
the  sins  of  his  son.  Everyone  would  stand  on 
his  own  merits,  and  on  his  own  merits  at  the 
time  when  the  doom  came.  This  doctrine  man- 
ifestly marked  an  important  step  forward  in  re- 
ligious thought.  It  meant  an  increased  morali- 
zation  of  religion.  It  meant  an  increased  sense 
of  personal  responsibility.  It  meant  that  here- 
after the  individual  would  gradually  supplant 
the  nation  as  the  unit  of  value  in  religion.  This 
line  of  development  was  in  some  regards  even 
more  important  than  that  of  the  law.  Ezekiel, 
therefore,  in  his  double  capacity  as  prophet  and 
priest  occupies  a  very  significant  place  in  the 
history  of  Old  Testament  religion.  H.  P.  Smith 
hardly  overshoots  the  mark  when  he  says  that, 
"taking  him  all  in  all,"  he  is  "the  most  influen- 
tial man  that  we  find  in  the  whole  course  of  He- 
brew history." 

206 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

Of  the  life  of  Ezekiel  we  know  comparatively 
little.  His  father  was  a  priest.  He  himself  was 
carried  into  captivity  along  with  Jehoiachin  in 
B-  C.  597.  He  settled  at  Tel-abib,  on  the  banks 
of  the  river  Chebar,  probably  a  canal  connecting 
Babylon  with  Nippur.  He  was  married 
(24.  18),  and  occupied  his  own  house  (3.  24; 
12.  3),  where  he  seems  to  have  been  frequently 
visited  by  the  elders  (8.  1 ;  14.  1 ;  20.  1).  His 
wife  died  suddenly  shortly  before  the  fall  of  Je- 
rusalem, and  her  death  was  used  as  a  symbol  to 
enforce  the  prophet's  message  of  doom.  He 
himself  did  not  on  this  occasion  observe  the 
usual  mourning  customs,  and  this  abstention  on 
his  part  was  declared  to  be  a  sign  of  the  stupe- 
faction which  would  overtake  the  people  when 
they  heard  of  the  capture  of  their  sacred  city 
(24.  15-24).  The  fall  of  Jerusalem  wrought  a 
sudden  change  in  the  content  of  the  prophet's 
message.  Previously  it  had  been  predominantly 
one  of  doom;  hereafter  it  became  almost  exclu- 
sively one  of  consolation.  How  long  this  latter 
part  of  his  ministry  continued  we  do  not  know. 
The  last  date  mentioned  in  his  book  is  B.  C. 
570,  and  it  is  not  improbable  that  he  died  shortly 
thereafter. 

Ezekiel's  call  to  the  prophetic  office  came  in 
the  fifth  year  of  his  captivity  (B.  C.  592).  It 
took  with  him,  as  with  the  prophets  generally, 
207 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

the  form  of  a  vision.  This  vision  is  described 
at  length  in  chapters  I  to  3.  In  reading  these 
chapters  we  are  impressed  with  the  contrast 
which  they  present  to  the  account  of  Isaiah's 
call  (chapter  6).  Isaiah,  with  a  few  strokes, 
sets  the  whole  scene  before  us.  Ezekiel,  on  the 
other  hand,  goes  into  elaborate  detail,  describing 
the  minutest  features  of  the  vision.  This  lit- 
erary method  meets  us  not  only  here,  but  in  va- 
rious parts  of  the  book.  It  reappears  in  the 
vision  of  chapters  8  to  11.  It  is  found  in  the 
allegory  of  the  foundling  child  who  became  the 
faithless  wife  of  her  benefactor  (chapter  16), 
and  in  the  story  of  the  two  adulterous  women, 
Oholah  and  Oholibah  (chapter  23).  It  is  also 
illustrated  in  the  vision  of  the  restored  temple 
(chapters  40  to  43).  Indeed,  it  is  characteris- 
tic of  Ezekiel's  type  of  mind.  He  has  a  won- 
derful capacity  for  grand  and  impressive  con- 
ceptions (compare  27;  32.  17-32;  37),  but  this 
is  coupled  with  a  singular  interest  in  mathe- 
matical calculation  and  minuteness  of  detail. 
Some  minds  see  in  this  combination  evidence  of 
remarkable  mental  ability.  To  an  extraordinary 
degree  it  exhibits,  they  think,  sustained  power 
of  imagination  and  clearness  and  steadiness  of 
vision.  Victor  Hugo,  for  instance,  places  Eze- 
kiel along  with  Homer  and  Aeschylus  in  the 
"avenue  of  the  immovable  giants  of  the  human 
208 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

mind."  But  this  is  a  judgment  in  which  most 
people  would  find  it  difficult  to  concur.  The 
average  person  has  the  feeling  that  Ezekiel's 
habit  of  detailed  elaboration  interferes  with  the 
impressiveness  of  his  thought.  It  complicates 
his  images  so  that  the  general  conceptions  that 
lie  back  of  them  are  often  lost  from  view.  Such 
is  the  case,  to  some  extent  at  least,  with  his  in- 
augural vision.  The  result  is  that  people,  as  a 
rule,  find  the  simplicity  of  Isaiah  6  far  more  im- 
pressive than  the  complex  elaboration  of  Eze- 
kiel  i. 

The  underlying  idea  of  Ezekiel's  vision  is 
essentially  the  same  as  that  of  Isaiah's.  And 
the  general  outline  of  his  imagery  is  a  not  un- 
worthy embodiment  of  his  thought.  Jehovah 
is  represented  as  coming  in  a  stormcloud  out  of 
the  north,  borne  by  a  wonderful  chariot,  which, 
by  virtue  of  the  power  of  the  spirit  in  its  wheels 
and  living  creatures,  moves  hither  and  thither, 
upward  and  downward.  Above  the  heads  of 
the  living  creatures  is  a  crystal  dome;  on  the 
dome  is  a  throne  with  Jehovah  in  shining  human 
form  seated  upon  it ;  and  round  about  the  throne 
is  a  brightness  like  that  of  the  rainbow.  What 
is  suggested  by  this  imagery  is  the  greatness  of 
God.  He  sits  upon  the  throne  of  the  universe; 
he  rules  everything.  He  moves  upon  the  wings 
of  the  wind ;  he  is  everywhere  present.  The 
209 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

rims  of  his  chariot  wheels  are  full  of  eyes 
(i.  18) ;  they  see  everything;  and  so  nothing 
escapes  his  all-seeing  eye.  No  wonder  that  the 
prophet,  as  he  beheld  this  wonderful  theophany 
with  all  its  symbolic  significance,  fell  upon  his 
face  (i.  28).  And  no  wonder  that  the  Spirit 
must  first  enter  into  him  before  he  could  again 
stand  upon  his  feet  (2.  2).  In  the  presence  of 
this  august  manifestation  he  was  himself  simply 
a  "son  of  man."  This  term  of  address  is  used 
one  hundred  and  sixteen  times  in  the  book  of 
Ezekiel,  and  always  by  Jehovah.  It  expresses 
the  weakness  and  humility  of  the  prophet  as  over 
against  God. 

In  Ezekiel's  thought  the  one  great  fact  of  the 
universe  was  God.  Everything  existed  for  him 
and  through  him.  In  the  impending  doom  of 
Israel  and  in  the  approaching  overthrow  of  the 
nations  of  the  world,  he  was  the  one  being  that 
was  to  abide.  Indeed,  the  whole  course  of  hu- 
man history  was  being  so  conducted  that  men 
would  come  to  "know  that  I  am  Jehovah,"  the 
One  who  is  and  who  persists  (compare  Exod. 
3.  13-15).  This  expression  occurs  no  less  than 
fifty-six  times  in  the  book  of  Ezekiel,  and  forms 
the  unifying  principle  of  the  prophet's  whole 
conception  of  history.  Everything  is  done  out 
of  regard  for  Jehovah's  holy  name.  His  name 
may  not  be  profaned.  It  was  because  Israel 
210 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

had  profaned  it  by  her  sins  that  she  was  carried 
into  captivity,  and  it  was  because  the  heathen 
nations  profaned  it  by  attributing  the  exile  of 
Israel  to  the  weakness  of  Jehovah  that  she  was 
to  be  restored  (36.  i6ff.).  The  fate  likewise  of 
the  heathen  peoples  was  to  be  determined  by 
their  attitude  toward  Jehovah  and  his  people 
(chapters  25  to  32).  His  sovereign  will  was 
the  one  controlling  factor  in  human  history. 
Everything  that  raised  itself  in  pride  against 
him  was  to  be  crushed  to  the  earth  (28.  2ff. ; 
29.  3).  This  idea  had  already  been  expressed 
by  Isaiah  (2.  iofF. ),  but  in  Ezekiel  it  received 
a  more  absolute  and  complete  expression.  His 
whole  teaching  was  dominated  by  it.  His 
thought  was  theocentric  throughout. 

This  idea  of  the  absolute  sovereignty  of  God 
naturally  imposed  upon  the  prophet  himself  the 
obligation  of  complete  submission  to  the  divine 
will.  We  find,  therefore,  with  him  no  such 
struggles  with  God,  no  such  complaints  against 
his  environment,  as  in  the  life  of  Jeremiah.  In 
only  one  instance  does  he  distinctly  shrink  from 
obeying  a  divine  command  (4.  14)  ;  and  this  is 
in  a  symbolical  action  which  was  probably  not 
intended  to  be  literally  carried  out.  It  may  also 
be  added  that  the  command  in  this  case  was  mod- 
ified so  as  to  be  less  offensive  to  the  prophet's 
nature.  Obedience  to  the  divine  will  had  ap- 
211 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

parently  been  so  completely  legislated  into  his 
being  that  to  receive  a  command  from  God  was 
at  once  to  perform  it.  That  Jehovah  might  ever 
be  mistaken  or  that  he  might  ever  be  unjust  in 
his  dealings  with  men  (18.  25,  29)  was  a  thought 
he  could  not  entertain.  In  all  his  relations  with 
men,  in  all  his  judgments  on  Israel,  Jehovah 
had  been  abundantly  justified.  This  unwaver- 
ing conviction  on  Ezekiel's  part  may  account  to 
some  degree  for  the  apparent  hardness  and  cold- 
ness of  his  own  nature.  In  temperament,  it  is 
true,  he  resembled  Amos  and  Isaiah  rather  than 
Hosea  and  Jeremiah.  He  was  stern  and  severe, 
strong  and  resolute.  But  the  severity  which 
manifests  itself  in  his  book  was  more  than  tem- 
peramental. It  was,  in  part  at  least,  the  out- 
come of  a  theological  conviction,  a  theodicy. 
The  destruction  of  Jerusalem  had  been  ordered 
by  Jehovah.  His  word  was  not  to  be  gainsaid. 
There  was,  then,  no  reason  to  lament  the  ap- 
proaching doom.  Once  or  twice,  it  is  true,  the 
prophet  cries  out  against  its  apparent  severity 
(9.  8;  11.  13).  But,  as  a  rule,  he  has  no  word 
of  sympathy  for  the  doomed  city.  He  even  ex- 
ults over  its  fall  (6.  11).  The  roll  written  on 
both  sides  with  "lamentations  and  mourning  and 
woe"  was  in  his  mouth  "as  honey  for  sweet- 
ness" (3.  3).  Such  an  attitude,  however,  on  his 
part  toward  his  own  people  was  not  natural  to 
212 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

him,  was  not  simply  the  outgrowth  of  his  tem- 
perament. He  had  a  more  tender  side  to  his  na- 
ture. This  is  clear  from  his  relation  to  the 
individual  Israelites  (18.  23,  3 if.;  33.  11),  and 
also  from  his  later  words  of  hope  to  the  exiled 
people  (chapters  34  to  37).  What  caused  him 
to  be  so  unrelenting  in  his  earlier  messages  of 
doom  was  the  divine  command.  Jehovah's  word 
had  made  his  forehead  "as  an  adamant  harder 
than  flint"  (3.  9). 

The  commission  which  Ezekiel  received  in  his 
inaugural  vision  did  not  differ  essentially  from 
that  of  the  earlier  prophets  (2.  1-7;  3.  4-1 1). 
His  message,  like  theirs,  was  to  be  a  message  to 
the  nation;  it  was  also  to  be  a  message  of  doom; 
like  those  before  him,  he  was  to  meet  with  oppo- 
sition ;  and  the  people,  as  of  old,  would  be  unre- 
sponsive, more  so  even  than  those  of  a  foreign 
tongue.  The  new  element  in  his  commission  was 
his  field  of  labor.  He  was  to  address  himself 
to  the  exiles.  All  the  prophets  before  his  time 
had  lived  and  labored  in  the  land  of  Is- 
rael. He  was  the  first  to  be  called  to  ex- 
ercise the  prophetic  office  among  "them  of 
the  captivity."  This  fact  necessarily  influenced, 
to  no  small  extent,  his  ministry.  His  mes- 
sage of  doom  had,  it  is  true,  a  certain  signifi- 
cance for  the  exiles.  It  meant  that  they  must 
give  up  their  hope  of  a  speedy  return  to  their 
213 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

native  land.  It  meant  also  the  end  of  their  old 
religious  nationalism.  But  it  did  not  and  could 
not  have  for  them  the  same  significance  that  it 
had  for  the  residents  of  Judah.  In  the  very  na- 
ture of  the  case,  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  could  not 
involve  them  in  any  such  danger  as  it  did  the 
people  in  the  homeland.  However  patriotic, 
then,  the  exiles  may  have  been,  they  must  have 
felt  themselves  more  or  less  detached  from  the 
fate  of  their  sacred  city.  Its  destruction  must 
have  presented  itself  to  their  minds  as  a  more 
or  less  objective  event,  one  that  they  could  view 
at  a  distance  and  in  which  they  were  not  them- 
selves immediately  implicated.  Hence,  we 
should  expect  a  prophet  among  them  to  be  more 
reflective  than  one  living  at  this  time  in  Jerusa- 
lem. We  should  also  expect  him  to  devote  more 
attention  to  the  problems  of  the  individual.  The 
conditions  of  life  in  a  foreign  land  must,  it  would 
seem,  make  this  inevitable.  And  so  it  turned 
out  in  Ezekiel's  case.  In  3.  16-21  we  have  what 
looks  like  an  appendix  to  his  call,  in  which  he  is 
commissioned  to  be  a  watchman  with  the  care  of 
individual  souls.  Whether  this  belonged  to  his 
original  commission  is  a  question  that  cannot 
easily  be  decided.  Perhaps  it  may  have  been 
added  later  by  the  prophet  himself.  In  any  case, 
it  formed  a  new  and  important  element  in  his 
ministry. 

214 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

Visions  played  a  more  important  part  in  the 
life  of  Ezekiel  than  in  that  of  any  of  the  other 
prophets.  In  addition  to  his  inaugural  vision, 
we  have  two  elaborate  visions  in  chapters  8  to 
ii  and  40  to  48.  In  the  former  the  prophet  is 
carried  to  Jerusalem,  where  he  sees  the  idola- 
tries in  the  temple,  the  slaughter  of  the  wicked, 
and  the  withdrawal  of  Jehovah  and  his  chariot 
from  the  ruined  city.  In  the  latter  he  receives 
instructions  for  the  rebuilding  of  the  temple  and 
the  government  of  the  restored  city  which  is 
henceforth  to  bear  the  name,  "Jehovah  is  there." 
It  hardly  seems  possible  that  all  the  details  of 
chapters  40  to  48  could  have  been  apprehended 
in  an  actual  vision.  It  is  probable,  then,  that  the 
prophet  expanded  and  elaborated  the  original 
content  of  his  visions.  Some,  indeed,  go  so  far 
as  to  regard  his  visions  as  a  mere  literary  form. 
But  this  is  out  of  harmony  with  the  specific 
language  employed.  ''The  hand  of  Jehovah  was 
upon  me,"  an  expression  that  occurs  again  and 
again  (3.  14,  22;  8.  1 ;  37.  1;  40.  1),  points  to 
some  extraordinary  psychological  experience. 
Furthermore,  the  general  conception  of  inspira- 
tion in  the  book  of  Ezekiel,  its  immediate  and 
extraordinary  character,  leads  one  naturally  to 
look  for  a  revelation  through  the  medium  of 
vision  and  audition.  These  experiences,  it  would 
seem,   came  upon   the  prophet   suddenly,   while 

215 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

the  elders,  for  instance,  were  seated  before  him 
(8.  i ;  14.  1,  2;  20.  1,  2).  It  may  also  be  noted 
that  two  or  three  passages  point  apparently 
to  his  being  endowed  with  telepathic  powers 
(11.  13;  24.  2).  From  this  it  is  clear  that  Eze- 
kiel  was  an  ecstatic  and  had  to  an  unusual  degree 
the  gift  of  clairvoyance. 

In  recent  years,  however,  it  has  been  con- 
tended that  Ezekiel  was  not  only  an  ecstatic,  as 
were  the  other  prophets,  but  that  he  was  afflicted 
with  a  deep-seated  nervous  disorder.  In  a  word, 
he  was  a  cataleptic,  suffering  at  times  from  anes- 
thesia, hemiplegia,  and  aphasia — ailments  which 
robbed  him  of  the  free  use  of  his  limbs  and  or- 
gans of  speech.  The  passages  on  which  this  view 
is  based  are  chiefly  these:  3.  15;  24.  25-27; 
33.  2if. ;  3.  25,  26;  and  4.  4-8.  In  3.  15  the 
prophet  speaks  of  himself  as  sitting  among  the 
captives  at  Tel-abib  "overwhelmed"  for  seven 
days.  This  is  supposed  to  be  a  case  of  anesthe- 
sia— a  cataleptic  numbness.  But  nothing  in  the 
text  requires  or  even  favors  such  an  interpreta- 
tion. The  same  expression  is  used  of  Ezra 
(9.  3-4),  and  of  the  three  friends  of  Job  it  is 
said  that  they  sat  silent  before  him  seven  days 
and  seven  nights  (Job  2.  13).  The  cause  in  each 
of  these  cases  was  purely  mental.  Ezekiel  was 
"overwhelmed"  with  the  seriousness  of  the  com- 
mission which  he  had  just  received.  His  expe- 
216 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

rience    in    this    instance    corresponds    to   Jesus's 
forty  days  in  the  wilderness. 

In  24.  25-27  and  33.  21,  22  we  read  of  the 
opening  of  the  prophet's  mouth  after  a  period 
during  which  he  had  been  dumb.  The  beginning 
of  this  dumbness  is  usually  found  in  3.  25,  26, 
where  Jehovah  declares  that  he  will  cause  the 
prophet's  tongue  to  cleave  to  the  roof  of  his 
mouth  so  that  he  will  be  dumb  and  will  not  be  a 
reprover  of  the  people.  The  ban  here  pro- 
nounced upon  the  prophet's  public  activity  is  no- 
where said  to  have  been  lifted  until  we  reach 
chapter  24.  Hence,  it  is  concluded  that  from 
almost  the  beginning  of  his  ministry  down  to 
the  fall  of  Jerusalem  Ezekiel  was  in  some  sense 
"dumb."  And  our  pathologists  tell  us  that  this 
dumbness  is  to  be  understood  in  a  physical  sense 
as  a  case  of  aphasia.  Chapters  4  to  24,  however, 
make  it  impossible  that  the  prophet  should  have 
been  completely  silent  during  this  long  period. 
Consequently,  we  are  told  that  he  was  subject 
simply  to  occasional  attacks  of  aphasia.  During 
much  of  the  time,  he  was  able  to  carry  on  his 
regular  prophetic  activity.  What,  then,  is  meant 
by  the  opening  of  his  mouth  in  24.  27  and  33.  22 
is  that  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  these  attacks 
ceased  altogether.  But  this  whole  theory  of 
aphasia  has  no  adequate  basis  in  the  text.  The 
key  to  the  passages  just  mentioned  is  to  be  found 
217 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

in  29.  21  and  16.  63,  where  "the  opening  of  the 
mouth"  is  manifestly  to  be  understood  in  a  fig- 
urative sense.  For  some  time  before  the  fall  of 
Jerusalem  Ezekiel  had  been  silenced  by  the  unbe- 
lief of  his  auditors,  who  flatly  denied  the  truth 
of  his  message  of  doom.  After  the  capture  of 
the  city,  however,  he  met  with  no  such  opposi- 
tion. His  mouth  was  now  opened.  He  could 
henceforth  speak  without  fear  of  contradiction. 
The  same  view  is  also  to  be  taken  of  3.  25,  26. 
The  dumbness  there  spoken  of  refers  to  a  tempo- 
rary silence  of  the  prophet  caused  by  the  opposi- 
tion of  the  people  early  in  his  ministry.  How 
long  this  silence  lasted  we  do  not  know.  There 
is  no  connection  between  this  passage  and 
24.  25-27  and  33.  21,  22. 

In  4.  4-8  we  are  said  to  have  a  case  of  hemi- 
plegia. The  prophet  is  here  commanded  to  lie 
on  his  left  side  three  hundred  and  ninety  or,  if 
we  follow  the  Septuagint,  one  hundred  and 
ninety  days,  and  then  on  his  right  side  forty 
days,  as  a  sign  of  the  length  of  the  captivity  of 
Israel  and  Judah.  This,  it  is  thought,  would 
have  been  impossible  unless  he  were  in  some  sort 
of  cataleptic  state.  But  it  is  by  no  means  certain 
that  this  emblem  prophecy  was  intended  to  be  lit- 
erally carried  out.  The  probability  is  that  it  was 
not.  But  even  if  it  was,  it  is  difficult  to  under- 
stand how  a  cataleptic  condition  could  be  en- 
218 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

joined  upon  anyone  for  a  certain  definite  period 
of  time.  One  commentator  has  attempted  to  ac- 
count for  it  by  the  theory  of  auto-suggestion. 
But  this  would  seem  to  be  out  of  the  question 
when  one  considers  the  length  of  time  here  speci- 
fied. And  another  commentator  holds  that  we 
have  here  a  later  interpretation  of  an  attack  of 
hemiplegia,  similar  to  Hosea's  interpretation  of 
his  marriage.  But  this  view  finds  no  adequate 
support  in  the  text  and  is  in  itself  inherently  im- 
probable. We  conclude,  therefore,  that,  however 
strange  some  of  Ezekiel's  symbols  and  actions 
may  appear  to  us,  they  are  not  to  be  ascribed  to 
any  form  of  catalepsy.  Even  if  he  was  afflicted 
with  such  a  malady,  his  prophetic  teaching 
would  not  on  that  account  be  discredited.  For 
every  man's  work  must  be  judged  by  its  fruits, 
not  by  its  roots.  Indeed,  it  might  be  regarded  as 
all  the  more  striking  evidence  of  divine  inspira- 
tion that  a  man  so  afflicted  should  have  been 
responsible  for  the  immortal  utterances  found  in 
his  book.  But  nothing  in  the  text,  as  we  have 
seen,  requires  such  a  view  of  him,  and  no  real 
light  is  in  this  way  thrown  upon  his  remarkable 
personality. 

Another    question    raised    with    reference    to 

Ezekiel  is  as  to  whether  the  symbolical  actions 

in  his   books   were   actually   performed   or  not. 

Besides  the  one  just  discussed  (4.  4-8)  there  are 

219    - 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

eleven  others.  All  of  these  except  37.  15-20, 
which  announces  the  reunion  and  restoration  of 
Judah  and  Joseph,  have  to  do  directly  or  indi- 
rectly with  the  fall  of  Jerusalem.  In  21.  18-23 
Nebuchadrezzar  is  represented  as  approaching 
Jerusalem;  in  4.  1-3  we  have  a  mimic  siege  of 
the  city;  in  4.  10,  11,  16,  17,  and  12.  17-20  are 
two  symbols  depicting  the  scarcity  of  food  and 
the  fear  of  the  besieged  people;  12.  1-7  sym- 
bolizes the  flight  of  the  king;  5.  i-4a  and 
24.  1-14  announce  in  different  ways  the  complete 
destruction  of  the  city;  21.  6,  7  and  24.  15-24 
tell  of  the  dismay  and  stupefaction  that  will 
come  upon  the  exiles  when  they  receive  the  tid- 
ings of  their  city's  fall;  and  in  4.  9a,  12-15  the 
eating  of  food  prepared  with  loathsome  fuel  is 
made  an  emblem  of  the  ceremonial  pollution 
which  the  new  captives  will  undergo  when  they 
are  forced  to  eat  unclean  food  in  exile. 

In  endeavoring  to  decide  whether  these  dif- 
ferent emblem  prophecies  were  literally  carried 
out  or  not,  it  should  first  be  observed  that  one 
of  them  is  explicitly  declared  to  have  been  a  par- 
able (24.  3).  It  should  also  be  noted  that  there 
is  a  symbolical  action  incorporated  in  one  of  the 
visions  (2.  8  to  3.  3).  Neither  of  these,  of 
course,  was  actually  performed.  The  same  is 
also  true  of  such  symbols  as  are  found  in  Jer. 
13.  i-ii  and  25.  15ft  It  is  clear,  then,  that  sym- 
220 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

bolical  actions  were  at  times  employed  by  the 
prophets  as  a  mere  literary  form.  But,  on  the 
other  hand,  there  are  unmistakable  indications 
that  they  were  not  infrequently  actually  carried 
out  (compare  I  Sam.  n.  7;  15.  2ji. ;  1  Kings 
11.  29ff. ;  22.  11;  Isa.  20;  Jer.  28;  32.  6-15). 
When,  however,  this  was  done  by  Ezekiel  and 
when  not,  it  is  difficult  to  determine.  He  gives 
us  no  clear  objective  means  of  deciding  the  ques- 
tion, and  in  such  cases  as  these  it  would  mani- 
festly be  unsafe  to  take  our  modern  standard  of 
taste  as  a  test.  For  in  matters  of  this  kind, 
ancient  Oriental  taste  may  have  differed  widely 
from  our  own.  Still,  it  is  probable  that  the  more 
simple  and  manifest  of  the  symbols,  such  as 
21.  6,  7  and  24.  15-18  were  literally  per- 
formed, and  that  the  more  difficult  ones,  such  as 
4.  4-8  and  5.  1 -4a,  were  not.  In  any  case,  there 
is  no  reason  for  supposing  that  Ezekiel's  method 
in  this  regard  differed  materially  from  that  of 
the  other  prophets. 

Another  point  of  dispute  concerning  Ezekiel 
has  to  do  with  the  general  nature  of  his  ministry. 
Was  he  primarily  a  preacher  or  a  writer?  Is 
his  book  the  deposit  of  an  active  public  minis- 
try, or  was  it,  rather,  a  product  of  the  study? 
The  latter  is  the  view  commonly  held.  "His  ser- 
mons," says  Kent,  "come  from  the  study  rather 
than  the  public  forum  and  reflect  the  leisure  and 
221 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

spirit  of  meditation  which  distinguished  the  exile 
from  the  strenuous  years  preceding."  And 
Smend  declares  that  the  whole  book  is  the  "log- 
ical development  of  a  series  of  thoughts  on  a 
carefully  elaborated  and  schematic  plan;  nothing 
can  be  removed  without  disarranging  the  whole." 
In  harmony  with  this  latter  statement,  it  is  held 
that  3.  25 f.  points  forward  to  24.  25-27,  and 
that  during  the  intervening  period  of  six  years 
Ezekiel  did  not  speak  in  public,  but  sent  out  his 
prophecies  in  the  form  of  written  tracts,  or  sim- 
ply addressed  himself  to  those  who  visited  him 
in  his  home.  Even  such  activity  as  this,  how- 
ever, on  his  part  would  have  violated  the  injunc- 
tion in  3.  26  that  he  was  not  to  be  a  "reprover" 
of  the  people.  The  fact  is,  as  we  have  already 
seen,  that  3.  25  f.  refers  simply  to  a  brief  aban- 
donment of  his  public  ministry  and  has  no  con- 
nection with  24.  25-27.  It  is  a  serious  mistake 
to  regard  the  book  of  Ezekiel  as  a  logically  ar- 
ticulated whole  or  as  a  literary  unity.  It  is,  rather, 
a  collection  of  originally  independent  discourses. 
Some  of  these  may  never  have  been  publicly  de- 
livered. But  nothing  could  be  further  from  the 
truth  than  to  say,  as  does  Skinner,  that  "If  the 
prophet  had  simply  worked  out  his  conceptions 
in  the  solitude  of  his  chambers,  the  result  would 
not  have  differed  much  from  what  we  actually 
find." 

222 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

There  are  numerous  indications  that  Ezekiel 
stood  in  an  active  relation  with  the  people  about 
him.  At  the  outset  of  his  ministry  he  was  com- 
missioned to  be  a  prophet  to  the  exiles,  to  speak 
the  words  of  Jehovah  to  them  (2.  3;  3.  4,  11, 
15)  ;  and  this  is  the  position  in  which  he  is  rep- 
resented throughout  the  book  (11.  15).  The 
elders  come  to  see  him  (8.  1 ;  14.  1 ;  20.  1),  and 
the  people  gather  to  hear  him  (33.  30-33).  Not 
infrequently  he  takes  some  popular  saying  as  the 
starting  point  of  his  discourse  (compare  II.  3; 
11.  15;  33.  24).  He  also  alludes  now  and  then 
to  the  mood  of  the  exiles.  They  complain  that 
they  are  suffering  because  of  their  fathers'  sins 
(18.  2);  they  charge  that  Jehovah  is  not  just 
and  impartial  in  his  dealings  with  men  (18.  25)  ; 
and  after  the  fall  of  the  city  they  cry  out  in 
despair  that  their  bones  are  dried  up  and  their 
hope  gone  (37.  11).  Their  attitude,  likewise, 
toward  himself  and  his  message  the  prophet 
takes  note  of.  At  one  time  they  declare  that 
his  prediction  of  doom  will  never  be  fulfilled 
(12.  22),  and  at  another  time  that  it  relates  only 
to  the  distant  future,  so  that  they  need  not  con- 
cern themselves  about  it  (12.  27).  His  words, 
they  say,  are  merely  "parables"  (20.  49),  not  to 
be  taken  seriously;  and  he  is  himself  unto  them 
not  as  a  prophet  with  commanding  authority, 
but  "as  a  very  lovely  song  of  one  that  hath  a 
223 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

pleasant  voice,  and  can  play  well  on  an  instru- 
ment" (33.  32). 

From  such  incidental  references  as  these  it  is 
evident  that  Ezekiel  stood  in  living  contact  with 
the  people  about  him.  But  a  more  decisive  con- 
sideration is  found  in  the  fact  that  the  most  dis- 
tinctive features  of  his  message  grew  out  of  the 
needs  of  the  exiles.  In  his  justification  of  the 
doom  of  Jerusalem  and  Judah  and  in  his  doc- 
trine of  individual  retribution,  he  was  not  deal- 
ing with  abstract  problems.  He  was  seeking  to 
meet  the  actual  questions  of  the  exiles,  seeking 
to  save  them  from  doubt  and  despair.  It  is  only 
as  we  bear  this  in  mind,  only  as  we  keep  in  view 
the  concrete  conditions  under  which  he  lived  and 
labored,  that  we  can  properly  understand  the 
teaching  of  his  book.  Everything,  then,  points 
toward  his  having  had  an  active  ministry  in  the 
colony  at  Tel-abib.  The  symbol  of  the  eating 
of  the  roll  in  2.  8  to  3.  3  does  not  imply  a  "lit- 
erary conception  of  prophecy  different  from  that 
of  the  preceding  prophets,"  but  simply  empha- 
sizes the  fact  of  the  prophet's  inspiration.  He 
was  delegated  to  bear  the  actual  words  of  Jeho- 
vah to  "them  of  the  captivity."  And  what  we 
have  in  his  book  is,  for  the  most  part,  the  de- 
posit of  such  a  direct  and  active  prophetic  career. 

The   book   of    Ezekiel   may   be   divided    into 
224 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

three  parts.  Chapters  I  to  24  deal  chiefly  with 
the  doom  of  Jerusalem  and  Judah ;  chapters  25 
to  32  contain  a  number  of  prophecies  against 
foreign  nations;  and  chapters  33  to  48  are  con- 
cerned mainly  with  the  restoration  of  Israel. 
The  middle  section  stands  in  close  relation  to  the 
other  two.  It  may  be  regarded  either  as  an  ap- 
pendix to  the  prophet's  message  of  doom  or  as 
an  introduction  to  his  message  of  hope.  The 
book  therefore,  as  a  whole,  has  two  main 
themes — one  doom,  the  other  hope.  We  begin 
with  the  former. 

Since  the  time  of  Amos  the  central  theme  of 
the  prophets  has  been  the  doom  of  Israel  or 
Judah.  This  doom,  as  we  have  seen,  was  not 
viewed  as  an  isolated  event.  It  was  projected 
against  the  background  of  a  world  judgment. 
And  so  it  is  also  in  Ezekiel  (7.  2-4;  30.  7;  38 
and  39).  It  is  from  this  point  of  view  that  his 
prophecies  against  foreign  nations,  as  well  as 
those  of  the  other  prophets,  are  best  un- 
derstood. But  Ezekiel's  message  of  doom  was 
delivered  under  different  circumstances  from 
those  that  attended  the  preaching  of  the  earlier 
prophets.  His  auditors  were  already  exiles. 
They  hoped,  it  is  true,  for  a  speedy  return  to 
their  native  land,  and  hence  were  not  disposed 
to  receive  with  any  favor  the  prophet's  predic- 
tion of  the  fall  of  Jerusalem.  But  they  were 
225 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

not  themselves  immediately  involved  in  its  fate. 
No  physical  peril  threatened  them.  Further- 
more, they  were  not  themselves  directly  respon- 
sible for  the  impending  doom.  They  shared,  to 
be  sure,  in  the  guilt  of  the  nation,  and  even  in 
their  exile  were  not  free  from  grievous  sins 
(Ezek.  2.  5ff. ;  3.  7ff. ;  14.  iff.;  20.  iff.).  But 
the  immediate  burden  of  the  approaching  fall  of 
the  city  did  not  rest  upon  them.  No  change  of 
conduct  on  their  part  could  avert  it. 

Ezekiel's  motive,  therefore,  in  his  message  of 
doom,  must  have  differed  to  some  extent  from 
that  of  the  earlier  prophets.  Aside  from  dispel- 
ling the  vain  hopes  of  the  exiles,  he  must  have 
also  had  the  aim  of  preparing  their  minds  for 
the  inevitable  catastrophe  so  that  their  religious 
faith  would  not  be  shaken  by  it.  It  is,  ap- 
parently, for  this  reason  that  he  dwells  at  such 
length  upon  the  sins  of  the  nation.  He  wishes 
to  reconcile  his  hearers  to  the  destruction  of  Je- 
rusalem by  showing  that  it  was  abundantly  de- 
served, that  it  was  indeed  required  by  the  divine 
justice. 

The  charges  which  he  brings  against  Israel 
are  practically  the  same  as  those  found  in  the 
preceding  prophets,  though  in  some  regards  they 
are  more  severe.  The  people,  and  especially  the 
princes,  have  been  guilty  of  injustice  and  immo- 
rality (9.  9;  11.  6;  22.  6-12,  27;  34).  They  have 
226 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

fallen  into  idolatry  and  all  manner  of  heathen 
abominations  (6.  1-14;  16.  1-43).  Even  the 
temple  precinct  itself  was  invaded  by  these  idola- 
trous practices  (8.  1-18).  As  nations  also,  the 
people  of  both  kingdoms  have  proven  themselves 
untrue  to  Jehovah  by  entering  into  alliances  with 
foreign  powers  (chapter  23).  Their  whole  his- 
tory, indeed,  has  been  one  long  apostasy.  Not 
even  at  its  beginning,  as  the  previous  prophets 
had  taught,  was  there  a  bright  spot.  Both  in 
Egypt  and  the  wilderness,  Israel  was  guilty  of 
idolatry  and  disobedience  to  the  divine  will 
(20.  6-13;  23.  3).  And  not  only  has  her  whole 
history  been  characterized  by  heathenish  tenden- 
cies, she  herself  is  of  heathen  descent.  Her 
father  was  an  Amorite  and  her  mother  a  Hit- 
tite  (16.  3).  This,  of  course,  is  to  be  understood 
in  an  ethical,  not  ethnical  sense.  Israel,  in  her 
moral  and  religious  nature,  did  not  differ  from 
the  early  heathen  inhabitants  of  Canaan.  She 
was  a  thoroughly  rebellious  people  (2.  3;  3.  9; 
12.  2).  She  had  broken  her  covenant  with  Je- 
hovah (16.  59).  She  had  persistently  played  the 
harlot  (16;  23). 

In  view  of  these  facts  it  must  have  been  clear 
to  the  most  obtuse  of  the  exiles  that  Jehovah  was 
justified  in  the  punishment  he  was  about  to  mete 
out  to  Jerusalem.  And  not  only  justified ;  his  very 
holiness  of  nature  required  that  a  people  who 
227 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

had  so  defiled  the  land  should  be  driven  away 
from  it  (36.  T7-19).  There  was,  accordingly, 
nothing  in  the  fall  of  the  nation  that  needed 
to  disturb  the  true  religious  faith  of  the  people. 
Jehovah  was  still  God,  and  was  working  out  his 
plans  in  the  world.  But  while  this  was  all  true, 
the  exile  offered  many  grounds  of  discourage- 
ment. Some  naturally  reasoned  that,  if  the  na- 
tion was  as  wicked  as  the  prophet  had  described 
and  was  deserving  only  of  punishment,  it  was 
hardly  worth  while  serving  Jehovah  any  longer. 
Hence,  they  are  represented  as  saying:  "We  will 
be  as  the  nations,  as  the  families  of  the  countries, 
to  serve  wood  and  stone"  (20.  32).  Others  felt 
that  they  were  being  unjustly  punished  for  the 
sins  of  their  fathers  (18.  2)  ;  and  others,  again, 
in  despair,  cried  out:  "Our  transgressions  and 
our  sins  are  upon  us,  and  we  pine  away  in  them ; 
how,  then,  can  we  live?"  (33.  to).  "Our  bones 
are  dried  up,  and  our  hope  is  lost ;  we  are  clean 
cut  off"  (2>7-  IT)- 

This  state  of  discouragement  seems  to  have 
become  the  prevailing  mood  of  the  exiles  after 
the  fall  of  Jerusalem.  From  this  time  on,  there- 
fore, Ezekiel  devoted  himself  almost  exclusively 
to  a  ministry  of  hope.  This  element  was  not  al- 
together lacking  in  his  earlier  discourses,  if  we 
may  trust  the  present  arrangement  of  the  book 
(11.  14-21;  16.  53-63;  17.  22-24;  20.  32-44; 
228 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

21.  32).  But  after  B.  C.  586  it  became  his  regu- 
lar theme.  We  have  in  chapters  34  to  48  three 
different  representations  of  the  future.  In  chap- 
ters 34  to  37,  together  with  the  passages  just 
cited  from  the  earlier  part  of  the  book,  we  have 
the  common  prophetic  conception  of  the  restora- 
tion of  Israel.  Chapters  38  and  39,  however, 
which  may  be  regarded  as  a  supplement  to  the 
preceding  chapters,  introduce  us  to  a  new  view 
of  the  Messianic  era.  After  Israel  has  been  for 
some  time  restored  to  her  native  land  she  is  to 
be  attacked  by  the  peoples  of  the  north  under  the 
leadership  of  Gog,  of  the  land  of  Magog.  These 
peoples  are  to  be  overthrown  with  a  terrible 
slaughter  upon  the  mountains  of  Israel,  after 
which  the  final  and  universal  reign  of  peace  is 
to  be  ushered  in.  The  idea  of  an  attack  upon  Is- 
rael by  the  nations  of  the  world  was  not  new. 
It  formed  a  part  of  the  traditional  eschatology 
(38.  17;  39.  8).  But  Ezekiel,  so  far  as  we  know, 
was  the  first  to  apply  it  to  the  distant  future 
(38.  8,  16),  after  the  Messianic  era  had  already 
been  introduced.  This  representation  exercised 
an  important  influence  on  the  development  of 
apocalyptic.  It  also  served  a  practical  purpose 
in  helping  to  keep  alive  faith  in  the  ultimate  tri- 
umph of  the  kingdom  of  God.  No  matter  how 
discouraged  and  harassed  the  later  Jews  were,  it 
was  always  possible  for  them  to  turn  to  these 
229 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

chapters  in  Ezekiel  and  find  consolation  in  the 
thought  that  eventually  all  powers  hostile  to  the 
people  of  God  would  certainly  be  overthrown. 

In  chapters  40  to  48  we  have  a  picture  of  the 
future  from  the  priestly  point  of  view.  It  is  not 
a  purified  and  restored  nation,  with  a  Davidic 
king  at  its  head,  to  which  Ezekiel  here  looks  for- 
ward, but  an  ecclesiastical  community,  with  an 
elaborate  temple  ritual  and  a  prince  whose  chief 
function  it  is  to  provide  for  the  temple  service 
(46.  1- 18).  Many  regard  these  chapters  as  the 
crown  of  the  whole  book  and  see  in  them  a  de- 
scription of  the  final  state  of  the  redeemed  peo- 
ple. But  the  differences  between  them  and  chap- 
ters 34  to  37  are  so  great  that  this  view  is  hardly 
tenable.  It  would,  rather,  seem  that,  when  Eze- 
kiel, in  B.  C.  572,  wrote  chapters  40  to  48,  he 
had,  temporarily  at  least,  relinquished  his  earlier 
prophetic  ideal,  and  turned  his  attention  to  a 
more  practical  program  for  the  restored  commu- 
nity. There  are  traces  in  his  earlier  discourses 
of  a  tendency  toward  a  priestly  formulation  of 
the  requirements  of  Jehovah  (18.  5-9;  22.  7-12), 
but  here  this  tendency  is  worked  out  into  a  sys- 
tem of  statutes  and  ordinances,  a  theocratic  con- 
stitution. The  importance  of  this  program  for 
the  subsequent  history  of  Israel  has  already  been 
pointed  out.  It  became  the  foundation  of  Ju- 
daism. 

230 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

We  return,  then,  to  chapters  34  to  37  and  the 
related  passages  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  book 
for  Ezekiel's  prophetic  conception  of  the  future. 
In  its  main  outlines  this  conception  does  not  dif- 
fer materially  from  that  of  the  preceding 
prophets.  Both  Judah  and  Israel  are  to  be  re- 
stored (37.  15-28).  Their  restoration  is  to  be 
like  a  resurrection  from  the  dead  (37.  1-14.)- 
The  spirit  of  God  is  to  enter  into  them  and  they 
are  to  live.  The  land  is  also  to  be  restored  to  its 
former  productivity  (36.  1-15).  The  moun- 
tains are  to  shoot  forth  their  branches  and 
yield  their  fruit.  "Showers  of  blessing"  are  to 
fall  upon  the  people.  And  they  are  to  be  "se- 
cure in  their  land."  "They  shall  no  more  be  a 
prey  to  the  nations,  neither  shall  the  beasts  of 
the  earth  devour  them;  but  they  shall  dwell  se- 
curely, and  none  shall  make  them  afraid" 
(34.  28).  But  before  this  state  of  peace  and 
plenty  is  attained,  Israel  must  undergo  a  process 
of  purification.  The  rebels  and  those  that  trans- 
gress against  Jehovah  must  be  purged  out  of  her 
(20.  35-38;  compare  5.  3,  4a),  and  the  evil  shep- 
herds of  the  past,  "the  fat  and  the  strong,"  must 
be  destroyed  (34.  10,  16).  When  this  is  done 
Jehovah  himself  will  shepherd  his  people.  "I 
will  seek,"  he  says,  "that  which  was  lost,  and 
will  bring  back  again  that  which  was  driven 
away,  and  will  bind  up  that  which  was  broken, 
231 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

and  will  strengthen  that  which  was  sick" 
(34.  16).  But  he  will  not  do  this  alone  without 
a  visible  representative.  "I  will,"  he  says,  "set 
up  one  shepherd  over  them,  and  he  shall  feed 
them,  even  my  servant  David"  (34.  23).  Under 
this  new  ruler  Judah  and  Israel  will  be  reunited. 
"One  king  shall  be  king  over  them  all;  and  they 
shall  be  no  more  two  nations,  neither  shall  they 
be  divided  into  two  kingdoms  any  more" 
(2,7-  22)  ;  but  together  they  shall  dwell  in  the 
land,  and  "David  my  servant  shall  be  their  prince 
forever."  "My  tabernacle  also,"  Jehovah  con- 
tinues, "shall  be  with  them;  and  I  will  be  their 
God,  and  they  shall  be  my  people"  (37.  27). 

In  connection  with  this  picture  of  the  future, 
there  are  two  or  three  points  that  call  for  special 
attention.  First,  these  words  of  hope  were  in- 
tended for  the  exiles,  and  apparently  for  the 
exiles  alone.  In  11.  14-21  a  sharp  distinction 
is  drawn  between  them  and  the  inhabitants  of 
Jerusalem.  The  latter  lay  claim  to  the  promises 
of  the  past,  saying:  "Get  you  far  from  Jeho- 
vah; unto  us  is  this  land  given  for  a  possession." 
But  the  prophet  replies  that  it  is  those  who  have 
been  removed  far  off  among  the  nations  who 
are  to  inherit  the  land  and  be,  in  fact,  the  people 
of  God.  Again,  in  33.  23-29,  those  who  re- 
mained in  the  waste  places  after  the  fall  of  Jeru- 
salem are  reported  as  saying,  "Abraham  was  one, 
232 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

and  he  inherited  the  land :  but  we  are  many ;  the 
land  is  given  us  for  inheritance."  To  this  the 
prophet  replies  by  declaring  that  these  survivors 
themselves  will  be  visited  by  a  destructive  judg- 
ment which  will  make  it  clear  that  possession  of 
the  land  does  not  rest  upon  natural  grounds,  but 
upon  moral  fitness.  Everywhere  in  the  book  of 
Ezekiel  it  is  the  returned  exiles,  and  apparently 
they  alone,  who  are  to  share  in  the  Messianic 
salvation.  Of  those  who  remained  in  Palestine 
Ezekiel,  like  Jeremiah  (chapter  24),  seems  to 
have  had  a  low  opinion  (12.  16;  14.  21-23). 
The  future  of  Israel's  religion,  he  was  convinced, 
lay  with  "them  of  the  captivity." 

Another  point  to  be  observed  in  connection 
with  Ezekiel's  view  of  the  future  is  the  divine 
motive  for  the  restoration  of  Israel.  It  is  not 
love,  as  in  Hosea,  nor  compassion,  as  in  Jere- 
miah, but  jealousy,  regard  for  his  own  honor. 
Jehovah  would  not  permit  the  heathen  to  pro- 
fane his  holy  name  by  attributing  the  continu- 
ance of  Israel's  exile  to  his  own  weakness.  He 
must,  therefore,  restore  Israel  in  order  to  con- 
vince the  nations  that  he  is  Jehovah,  and  to  sanc- 
tify his  name  in  their  eyes.  Not  for  Israel's 
sake,  then,  was  the  restoration  to  be  accom- 
plished, but  for  his  own  name's  sake  (36.  20-23). 
Back  of  this  representation  lay  the  great  idea 
that  the  goal  of  human  history  is  to  be  found 

233 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

in  the  recognition  of  the  sovereign  will  of  God. 
Reverence  for  him  as  the  moral  ideal  is  the 
basis  of  all  true  religion.  In  the  idea  also  that 
the  restoration  of  the  exiles  did  not  depend  upon 
their  own  deserts  (36.  22,  32),  there  was  an 
element  of  consolation.  If  they  were  to  be  dealt 
with  according  to  their  own  merits,  there  would 
be  little  hope  for  them.  Their  one  ground  of 
confidence  lay  in  the  gracious  will  of  God.  We 
have  here  an  anticipation  of  the  Pauline  doc- 
trine of  justification  by  faith. 

But  a  more  remarkable  anticipation  of 
Pauline  teaching  is  to  be  found  in  Ezekiel's  doc- 
trine of  regeneration  and  the  impartation  of  the 
divine  Spirit.  Israel,  before  her  restoration, 
and  as  a  condition  of  it,  is  to  undergo  a  complete 
change  of  character.  "I  will  sprinkle,"  says  Je- 
hovah, "clean  water  upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be 
clean:  from  all  your  filthiness,  and  from  all 
your  idols,  will  I  cleanse  you.  A  new  heart  also 
will  I  give  you,  and  a  new  spirit  will  I  put  within 
you;  and  I  will  take  away  the  stony  heart  out 
of  your  flesh,  and  I  will  give  you  a  heart  of 
flesh.  And  I  will  put  my  Spirit  within  you,  and 
cause  you  to  walk  in  my  statutes,  and  ye  shall 
keep  my  ordinances,  and  do  them"  (36.  25-27). 
This  is  one  of  the  high  points  in  Ezekiel's  teach- 
ing. Jeremiah  had  already  taught  the  inward- 
ness of  true  religion  and  the  need  of  a  radical 
234 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

change  of  heart,  but  nowhere  does  he  express 
so  clearly  as  we  have  it  here  the  idea  of  the 
new  birth.  Ezekiel  at  this  point  takes  a  step 
beyond  Jeremiah. 

The  promise,  however,  of  a  transformed  and 
restored  nation  did  not  meet  all  the  religious  dif- 
ficulties of  the  exiles  nor  remove  all  their 
grounds  of  discouragement.  They  were  still 
disturbed  by  the  apparent  injustice  of  God's 
dealings  with  them.  Some  thought  they  were 
being  punished  for  the  sins  of  their  fathers,  and 
others  felt  they  were  under  the  ban  of  their  own 
past.  There  was,  therefore,  no  hope  for  them. 
It  was  to  meet  this  situation  that  Ezekiel  formu- 
lated the  doctrine  of  individualism,  the  most  sig- 
nificant element  in  his  teaching.  This  doctrine 
is  distinctly  expressed  in  five  different  passages 
(3.  16-21;  14.  12-20;  18.  1-32;  33.  1-9;  33. 
10-20).  In  two  of  these  (3.  16-21;  33.  1-9) 
the  prophet  is  chiefly  concerned  with  the  ques- 
tion of  the  extent  of  his  own  responsibility.  The 
answer  given  to  this  question  is  that  he  is  re- 
sponsible for  the  faithful  performance  of  his 
duties  as  watchman,  but  not  for  their  successful 
issue.  But  in  these  two  passages,  as  well  as  in 
the  other  three,  the  general  idea  of  individual 
responsibility  and  individual  retribution  is  also 
clearly  taught.     There  is  no  wholesale  condem- 

235 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

nation  and  no  wholesale  salvation  of  men. 
Everyone  is  judged  by  himself  alone.  There  is 
also  no  transference  either  of  merit  or  guilt.  If 
a  calamity  come  upon  a  land,  "though  these 
three  men,  Noah,  Daniel,  and  Job,  were  in 
it,  they  should  deliver  but  their  own  souls  by 
their  righteousness"  (14.  14).  And  so,  on  the 
other  hand,  "the  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die: 
the  son  shall  not  bear  the  iniquity  of  the  father, 
neither  shall  the  father  bear  the  iniquity  of  the 
son;  the  righteousness  of  the  righteous  shall  be 
upon  him,  and  the  wickedness  of  the  wicked 
shall  be  upon  him"  (18.  20).  The  destiny  of 
every  individual  is  determined  by  his  own  char- 
acter. But  Ezekiel  does  not  stop  there.  He  goes 
on  to  say  that  it  is  within  the  power  of  every 
individual  to  change  his  own  character  and  so 
determine  for  himself  whether  his  own  lot  is 
to  be  that  of  life  or  death  (18.  21-32;  33. 
10-20).  The  question  of  salvation,  then,  is 
purely  individual  and  personal.  There  is  no 
hereditary  guilt  and  no  vicarious  suffering. 

That  this  teaching  was  in  the  abstract  admira- 
bly adapted  to  meet  the  practical  needs  of  the 
exiles  is  generally  admitted.  It  cut  from  under 
them  all  ground  of  complaint  against  the  divine 
justice.  But  it  did  so,  according  to  many,  at  the 
expense  of  the  actual  facts  of  life.  The  indi- 
vidual, it  is  said,  is  not  so  independent  of  others, 
236 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

and  of  his  own  past,  as  is  here  declared.  The 
prophet  here  gives  us  an  "atomistic"  view  of  the 
moral  life.  He  denies  the  facts  of  heredity  and 
social  solidarity,  and  "cuts  up  the  individual  life 
into  sections  which  have  no  moral  relation  to 
one  another."  But  this  criticism,  which  is  not 
uncommon,  rests  upon  a  misunderstanding  of 
Ezekiel's  teaching.  It  assumes  that  he  was  writ- 
ing from  an  empirical  point  of  view,  and  meant 
to  assert  that  in  all  the  relations  of  life  here  and 
now  the  law  of  individual  retribution  is  strictly 
observed.  But  this  would  so  manifestly  have 
contradicted  the  experiences  of  the  exiles  that 
we  cannot  credit  Ezekiel  with  it.  His  standpoint 
is  ideal.  He  is  writing  from  a  transcendent  or 
eschatological  point  of  view.  What  he  is  con- 
sidering is  the  soul  simply  in  its  relation  to  God ; 
and  this  he  thinks  of  as  finally  settled  at  the 
great  day  of  Jehovah  which  is  not  far  distant. 
Between  this  standpoint  and  the  empirical  he 
may  not  himself  have  sharply  distinguished. 
The  two  may  for  him  have  been  to  some  extent 
confused  with  each  other  (compare  21.  3,  4  with 
9.  4-6).  This  was  almost  inevitable  at  a  time 
when  the  line  had  not  as  yet  been  sharply  drawn 
between  the  temporal  and  the  eternal,  the  ma- 
terial and  the  spiritual.  But  that  the  super- 
empirical  or  eschatological  factor  was  prominent 
in  the  thought  of  Ezekiel  cannot  be  questioned. 
237 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

Life  and  death  with  him  did  not  mean  merely 
physical  life  and  physical  death.  These  terms 
carried  with  them  a  higher  spiritual  connota- 
tion. Something  of  what  we  mean  by  eternal 
life  and  death  attached  to  them.  Only  as  we 
realize  this  can  we  fully  appreciate  the  religious 
energy  of  the  prophet's  message.  And  from  this 
higher  point  of  view  his  teaching  concerning  the 
individual  is  eminently  true.  The  ultimate  des- 
tiny of  every  person  must  rest  with  himself 
alone.  This  is  a  necessary  requirement  of  abso- 
lute ethics. 

To  have  thus  disentangled  the  life  of  the  indi- 
vidual from  that  of  the  nation  was,  of  course,  not 
the  achievement  of  Ezekiel  alone.  It  was  the  out- 
come of  a  long  development.  The  idea  that  the 
righteous  would  not  perish  with  the  guilty  was  an 
ancient  conviction  (Gen.  18.  25),  and  must  have 
formed  the  background  of  the  earlier  literary 
prophets  (compare  Amos  9.  9,  10).  It  was, 
indeed,  implied  in  the  current  doctrine  of  the 
remnant.  Then,  too,  we  cannot  suppose  that 
these  early  prophets  attributed  to  Jehovah  a 
lower  moral  standard  than  that  represented  by 
the  king  Amaziah,  who  spared  the  children  of 
his  father's  murderers  when  the  latter  were  put 
to  death  (2  Kings  14.  5,  6).  But  while  the  idea 
of  a  distinction  between  the  fate  of  the  righteous 
and  that  of  the  wicked  was  not  new  with  Eze- 
238 


THE  PROPHET  OF  INDIVIDUALISM 

kiel,  it  was  he,  so  far  as  we  know,  who  first 
formulated  the  doctrine  of  individualism.  He 
made  it  a  necessary  correlate  of  the  divine  jus- 
tice. And  not  only  did  he  do  this.  He  also  put 
back  of  it  the  gracious  will  of  God,  and  so  trans- 
formed it  into  a  gospel.  "As  I  live,  saith  the 
Lord  Jehovah,  I  have  no  pleasure  in  the  death 
of  the  wicked;  but  that  the  wicked  turn  from 
his  way  and  live:  turn  ye,  turn  ye  from  your 
evil  ways;  for  why  will  ye  die,  O  house  of  Is- 
rael?" (t,3-  n).  This  is  the  most  precious  say- 
ing in  the  whole  book  of  Ezekiel.  It  comes 
nearer  than  any  other  to  the  heart  of  the  New 
Testament.  As  we  read  it,  we  can  almost  hear 
the  voice  of  the  Master  saying,  "There  is  joy 
in  the  presence  of  the  angels  of  God  over  one 
sinner  that  repenteth"   (Luke  15.  10). 


239 


CHAPTER  VII 

DEUTERO-ISAIAH  THE  PROPHET  OF 
UNIVERSALISM 

Amos  and  Hosea,  as  we  have  seen,  owe  much 
of  their  present  distinction  to  the  work  of  mod- 
ern critics.  But  the  debt  of  Deutero-Isaiah  to 
this  source  is,  in  a  sense,  still  greater.  The  very- 
knowledge  of  his  existence  is  a  modern  discov- 
ery. For  some  reason  or  through  some  circum- 
stance, his  prophecies  came  to  be  attached  to 
the  book  of  Isaiah  and  to  be  regarded  as  a  part 
of  the  work  of  the  great  prophet  of  the  eighth 
century.  This  was  the  view  of  Jesus  the  son  of 
Sirach  (Ecclus.  48.  22-25),  wno  uved  about 
B.  C.  200.  It  was  also  the  opinion  universally 
held  until  a  little  over  a  century  ago. 

The  arguments  which  have  led  modern  schol- 
ars to  assign  Isaiah  40  to  66  to  another  and  later 
prophet  are  partly  literary,  partly  theological, 
and  partly  historical.  The  language  and  style 
of  the  two  parts  of  the  book  differ  so  widely 
from  each  other  that  they  can  hardly  have  ema- 
nated from  the  same  person.  The  same  is  also 
to  be  said  of  the  theological  ideas.  And  the  his- 
torical conditions  presupposed  in  the  latter  part 
of  the  book  require  us  to  believe  that  the  author 
240 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

must  have  lived  about  one  hundred  and  fifty 
years  after  the  time  of  Isaiah.  The  people  of 
Israel  are  no  longer  in  their  own  land,  but  are 
scattered  to  the  four  corners  of  the  earth 
(43.  5,  6).  Jerusalem  is  destroyed  and  the  cities 
of  Judah  laid  waste  (44.  26).  The  dominant 
world  power  is  not  Assyria  but  Babylon.  And 
Babylon  is  soon  to  be  destroyed  (46.  I,  2;  47). 
A  new  world-conqueror,  Cyrus  by  name,  has 
appeared  upon  the  scene  (44.  28).  He  has  al- 
ready subdued  many  nations,  and  before  long 
will  perform  the  pleasure  of  Jehovah  upon 
Babylon  herself  (48.  14).  This  general  situ- 
ation is  not  predicted  as  something  that  is  to 
occur  in  the  distant  future.  It  is  assumed  to 
be  already  existent.  Cyrus  is  already  upon  the 
scene.  The  people  of  Israel  are  already  in  exile. 
Indeed,  it  is  to  them  as  exiles  that  these  prophe- 
cies are  addressed.  There  can,  then,  be  no  doubt 
that  the  author  of  these  chapters  himself  lived 
in  the  time  of  the  exile. 

For  some  reason  the  writer  did  not  attach  his 
name  to  the  prophecies.  It  has  been  suggested 
that  he  may  himself  have  issued  them  under  the 
name  of  Isaiah,  in  order  to  express  the  convic- 
tion that  the  divine  word  he  was  commissioned 
to  deliver  was  in  substance  the  same  as  that 
spoken  by  the  greatest  of  the  prophets  of  the 
past.  In  that  case  his  work  was  pseudepi- 
241 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

graphic,  like  that  of  the  later  apocalyptists.  But 
while  this  would  account  for  the  loss  of  the 
author's  name  and  would  also  explain  the  fact 
that  his  prophecies  form  a  part  of  the  book  of 
Isaiah,  there  is  no  direct  evidence  in  support  of 
it.  Not  the  slightest  indication  is  anywhere 
given  in  these  chapters  that  the  author  intended 
that  they  should  pass  for  the  work  of  Isaiah. 
There  is  no  title,  no  superscription.  Isaiah  is 
nowhere  mentioned  by  name.  There  is  abso- 
lutely nothing  that  would  suggest  to  the  reader 
that  the  author  lived  in  the  eighth  century  before 
Christ.  We  therefore  conclude  that  the  author 
did  not  himself  connect  his  prophecies  with  the 
name  of  Isaiah.  Nevertheless,  there  is  a  cer- 
tain spiritual  affinity  between  the  two  men.  The 
author  of  Isaiah  40  to  66  had  evidently  been  a 
careful  student  of  Isaiah.  We  observe,  for  in- 
stance, that  he  uses  again  and  again  Isaiah's 
characteristic  designation  of  Jehovah,  "the  Holy 
One  of  Israel,"  and  not  only  uses  the  name  but 
shares  in  and  emphasizes  the  fundamental  idea 
thus  expressed.  There  is,  then,  a  double  sig- 
nificance in  the  name  of  Deutero-Isaiah,  applied 
to  him.  It  means  not  only  that  his  prophecies 
form  the  second  part  of  the  book  of  Isaiah,  but 
also  that  they  reflect  the  spirit  and  reveal  the 
influence  of  the  great  prophet  of  the  eighth  cen- 
tury. 

242 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

Thus  far  we  have  spoken  of  Isaiah  40  to  66 
as  though  these  chapters  were  all  the  work  of 
one  man.  And  such  is  the  view  of  not  a  few 
scholars.  But  as  chapters  1  to  39  received  later 
additions,  it  is  not  improbable  that  this  was  also 
the  case  with  the  second  part  of  the  book.  Any- 
how, it  will  have  to  be  admitted  that  chapters 
56  to  66  apparently  come  from  a  later  date  than 
chapters  40  to  55.  After  chapter  55  nothing  is 
said  about  the  return  of  the  Jews  from  Baby- 
lon. Everything  points  to  Jerusalem  as  the  cen- 
ter of  the  life  of  the  people.  But  how  far  be- 
yond the  return  from  Babylon  (B.  C.  537)  these 
later  chapters  carry  us  is  a  difficult  question  to 
answer.  The  wall  of  the  city  has  apparently 
not  been  rebuilt  (58.  12;  60.  10).  Hence,  we 
cannot  go  down  further  than  B.  C.  445.  But 
whether  the  second  temple  has  been  erected  (B. 
C.  520-516)  is  not  clear.  Some  passages  (56.  5, 
7;  60.  7,  13;  66.  6,  2off. )  seem  to  imply  its  ex- 
istence ;  others,  however,  seem  to  imply  with 
equal  clearness  the  contrary  (63.  18;  64.  10,  11  ; 
66.  1-2).  The  result  is  that  there  is  a  wide  di- 
versity of  opinion  among  scholars  as  to  the 
origin  of  these  chapters.  Some  assign  them  to 
a  prophet  who  is  supposed  to  have  lived  between 
B.  C.  458  and  445,  and  to  whom  they  give  the 
name  Trito-Isaiah.  Others  think  we  have  here 
a  number  of  anonymous  prophecies  written  be- 

243 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

tween  the  return  from  Babylon  and  the  time  of 
Nehemiah  (B.  C.  537-445).  Still  others  see  in 
them  the  work  of  Deutero-Isaiah  himself  during 
the  later  years  of  his  life.  In  view  of  these  con- 
flicting opinions,  it  is  fortunate  that  the  most 
important  utterances  of  Deutero-Isaiah  are,  in 
any  case,  to  be  found  in  chapters  40  to  55.  The 
later  chapters  of  the  book,  if  from  him,  add  very 
little  to  his  positive  message.  We  shall,  there- 
fore, make  the  earlier  chapters  (40  to  55)  the 
chief  basis  of  our  study. 

It  is  remarkable  how  completely  Deutero- 
Isaiah  has  hidden  himself  behind  his  message. 
Not  only  has  he  withheld  from  us  his  name. 
We  do  not  even  know  with  certainty  where  he 
lived.  The  common  view  is  that  his  home  was 
in  Babylonia;  and  this  may  be  correct,  but  the 
evidence  adduced  in  its  support  is  far  from  con- 
clusive. The  word  "here"  in  52.  5  refers  ap- 
parently to  Babylonia,  but  so  also  does  "from 
thence"  in  52.  11.  The  latter  verse,  therefore, 
leaves  the  impression  that  wherever  the  author's 
home  was  it  certainly  was  not  in  Babylonia. 
Hence,  some  have  found  it  in  Phoenicia,  others 
in  Egypt,  and  still  others  in  Palestine.  In  favor 
of  Palestine,  it  is  urged  that  the  author's  vocab- 
ulary is  distinctively  Palestinian.  The  natural 
and  artificial  objects  referred  to  are  most  of 
them  characteristic  of  the  Holy  Land  rather  than 
244 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALIS*! 

Babylonia.  But  over  against  this,  it  is  claimed 
by  others  that  Deutero-Isaiah's  style  shows  clear 
traces  of  Babylonian  influence.  And  if  it  is  in- 
sisted that  the  author  speaks  at  times  as  though 
he  were  a  resident  of  Palestine  (41.  9;  40.  2,  9), 
it  is  replied  that  he  simply  transports  himself 
thither  in  imagination.  Thus  the  argument  goes 
on.  The  fact  is  that  data  for  a  final  solution  of 
the  problem  do  not  exist.  Chapters  40  to  55  are 
singularly  lacking  in  local  coloring.  The  bur- 
den of  the  Babylonian  exiles  is  manifestly  upon 
the  prophet's  heart  (40.  27;  48.  20),  and  hence 
it  is  natural  to  seek  him  among  them.  But  his 
thought  is  rooted  in  no  single  place.  From  his 
watchtower,  wherever  it  may  have  been,  in  Baby- 
lonia or  Palestine,  in  Egypt  or  Phoenicia,  he  sur- 
veys the  four  corners  of  the  earth.  In  a  real 
sense  the  whole  world  was  his  parish. 

But  whether  he  at  the  same  time  carried  on 
an  active  local  ministry  is  another  point  on 
which  he  has  left  us  in  doubt.  The  common 
opinion  is  that  he  did  not.  A  recent  writer,  for 
instance,  describes  him  as  "neither  a  man  of 
action  nor  a  preacher,  but  an  observer,  a  writer, 
a  recluse."  In  favor  of  this  view  various  con- 
siderations are  urged,  such  as  the  anonymity  of 
his  prophecies,  the  fact  that  they  are  addressed 
to  no  definite  audience,  their  lack  of  concrete 
detail,  and  the  continuity  of  thought  that  binds 

245 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

them  together  into  a  literary  whole.  But  to  all 
this  the  reply  is  made  that  a  man  of  such  pas- 
sion as  Deutero-Isaiah  could  not  have  lived  the 
life  of  a  recluse.  His  very  intensity  of  feeling 
must  have  driven  him  into  the  forum.  Further- 
more, there  are  indications  here  and  there  (50. 
6,  7;  49.  4)  that  he  was  probably  himself  forced 
to  suffer  for  his  public  activity.  In  any  case, 
there  is  nothing  in  the  fact  of  the  anonymity  of 
his  prophecies  that  necessarily  conflicts  with 
their  having  been  first  publicly  delivered  to 
groups  of  hearers.  And  as  for  their  supposed 
literary  continuity,  it  is  by  no  means  certain  that 
this  continuity  exists  in  the  form  and  to  the  ex- 
tent that  is  frequently  claimed.  It  is  quite  pos- 
sible, indeed  probable,  that  we  have  here  a  num- 
ber of  originally  independent  prophecies.  These 
prophecies  may  at  first  have  been  issued  as  tracts, 
and  have  been  the  direct  outcome  of  an  active 
public  ministry.  But,  however  they  originated, 
it  will  have  to  be  admitted  that  they  have  a  more 
distinctly  literary  cast  than  do  the  earlier  pro- 
phetic books.  And  this  fact,  together  with  the 
author's  concealment  of  his  own  personality,  in- 
dicates that  in  him  the  transition  from  prophecy 
to  apocalyptic  had  already  begun. 

The  date  of  Deutero-Isaiah,   as  we  have  al- 
ready seen,  appears  to  be  definitely  fixed  by  the 
historical   references   in   his   prophecies.      Cyrus 
246 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

is  on  the  scene.  Babylon  is  about  to  fall.  The 
Jewish  exiles  are  soon  to  go  free.  Shortly,  then, 
before  the  fall  of  Babylon,  in  B.  C.  538,  must,, 
it  would  seem,  have  been  the  date  of  the  Deu- 
tero-Isaiah's  ministry.  But  a  distinction  should, 
perhaps,  be  made  between  chapters  40  to  48 
and  chapters  49  to  55.  The  latter,  while  they 
look  forward  to  the  release  of  the  exiles  (52. 
1  if.;  55.  I2f. ),  say  nothing  about  Cyrus  and 
the  capture  of  Babylon.  They  may,  therefore, 
have  been  written  after  the  fall  of  the  city,  but 
before  the  issue  of  the  decree  permitting  the 
Jewish  captives  to  return  to  their  homeland 
(Ezra  6.  1-5).  In  that  case  they  were  issued  a 
few  months  later  than  the  preceding  prophecies, 
and  B.  C.  540-537  might  be  fixed  upon  as  the 
date  of  chapters  40  to  55  as  a  whole.  If  Deu- 
tero-Isaiah  also  wrote  chapters  56  to  66  he  must 
have  continued  his  ministry  in  Jerusalem  after 
the  return  from  the  Babylonian  captivity. 

Clear,  however,  and  apparently  final  as  all 
this  is,  it  has  in  recent  years  been  called  in  ques- 
tion by  a  number  of  American  scholars,  notably 
C.  C.  Torrey,  C.  F.  Kent,  and  W.  H.  Cobb. 
These  scholars  contend  that  in  the  two  instances 
where  Cyrus  is  mentioned  by  name  (44.  28; 
45.  1 )  we  have  later  interpolations,  and  that  all 
the  passages  that  have  been  supposed  to  refer  to 
him  (41.  2-4,  25;  44.  28;  45.  1-6,  13;  46.  11; 
247 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

48.  14,  15)  really  refer  to  Israel,  the  servant- 
nation.  With  one  stroke  they  thus  eliminate 
from  the  prophecies  of  Deutero-Isaiah  the  one 
element  that  bound  them  to  a  definite  historical 
situation.  Babylon  and  its  fall,  it  is  true,  are 
still  mentioned,  But  Babylon  remained  a  great 
city  long  after  it  surrendered  to  Cyrus,  and  for 
several  centuries  was  "the  natural  representa- 
tive in  the  eyes  of  the  Jews  of  the  great  world- 
power  in  the  East"  (Cobb).  It  may,  then,  be 
in  this  sense,  and  not  as  an  independent  Semitic 
kingdom,  that  it  is  referred  to  in  Isa.  47  and 
46.  1,  2.  These  passages  consequently  require 
no  definite  date.  And  so  it  is  also  with  the  ref- 
erences to  the  return  from  the  exile.  "We 
must,"  says  Cobb,  "enlarge  our  conception  of 
the  exile.  The  fifty  years  which  a  few  Jews 
spent  in  Babylonia  after  the  fall  of  the  Holy 
City  were  simply  a  sample  of  what  was  going 
on  in  many  lands  in  the  time  of  our  prophet, 
whoever,  whenever,  and  wherever  he  was." 
What  is  said  in  Deutero-Isaiah  about  the  exiles 
may  therefore  refer  to  that  "wider  dispersion 
over  the  civilized  world  of  the  Israelites  whose 
ingathering  continued  to  be  an  object  of  aspira- 
tion long  after  the  Jewish  state  had  been  re- 
established." From  this  it  is  clear  that  if  we 
eliminate  the  references  to  Cyrus  from  Deutero- 
Isaiah,  we  have  no  certain  means  by  which  to 
248 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

date  his  prophecies.  There  was  no  specific 
occasion,  so  far  as  we  know,  that  gave  rise 
to  them.  They  are  left  suspended  in  the  air, 
and  may  have  been  written  at  any  time  dur- 
ing the  Persian  period  (B.  C.  538-332).  In- 
deed, they  need  not  even  be  confined  to  this 
period. 

The  question  thus  raised  has  an  important 
bearing  on  the  interpretation  of  Deutero-Isaiah. 
Not  only  are  many  individual  passages  affected 
by  it,  but  the  whole  theme  of  the  book  is  in- 
volved. Driver,  for  instance,  defines  the  theme 
as  "Israel's  restoration  from  exile  in  Babylon." 
And  this,  supplemented  by  the  idea  of  the  final 
coming  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  is  the  natural 
view,  so  long  as  we  regard  the  prophecies  as 
written  shortly  before  the  fall  of  Babylon  and 
as  having  in  mind  a  concrete  historical  situation. 
Their  aim,  then,  was,  as  Driver,  says,  "to  arouse 
the  indifferent,  to  reassure  the  wavering,  to  ex- 
postulate with  the  doubting,  to  announce  with 
triumphant  confidence  the  certainty  of  the  ap- 
proaching restoration."  But  if  they  were  writ- 
ten during  the  Persian  period  and  contained 
originally  no  reference  to  Cyrus  and  his  capture 
of  Babylon,  it  is  evident  that  we  must  form  a 
different  conception  of  their  character  and  pur- 
pose. They  were  not,  according  to  this  view, 
the  outcome  of  any  crisis  in  the  life  of  the  peo- 
249 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

pie.  They  served  no  immediate  historical  pur- 
pose. They  were  simply  religious  discourses  or 
poems  of  a  general  character  inculcating  the 
truth  of  "the  supremacy  of  Jehovah  and  the  call 
of  Israel  to  be  his  servant,  to  reveal  his  light 
and  truth  to  all  mankind"  (Cobb).  There  are 
thus  two  quite  distinct  conceptions  of  the  origin 
and  character  of  these  prophecies. 

In  deciding  between  these  views  it  should 
first  be  observed  that  it  is  a  serious  objection  to 
the  more  recent  of  the  two  that  it  requires  a 
modification  of  the  received  text.  No  matter 
how  plausible  the  reasons  may  be  for  eliminat- 
ing the  name  of  Cyrus  from  44.  28  and  45.  I, 
they  are  not  and  cannot  be  made  sufficiently  ob- 
jective to  overcome  the  natural  and  well- 
grounded  prejudice  in  favor  of  the  traditional 
reading,  wherever  this  reading  is  not  manifestly 
obscure  or  inconsistent  with  its  context.  And 
that  this  is  not  the  case  in  the  present  instance 
cannot  be  gainsaid.  But  admitting  the  possible 
correctness  of  the  change  in  the  text,  we  still 
have  difficulty  in  applying  the  apparent  Cyrus- 
passages  to  Israel.  The  person,  individual  or 
collective,  addressed  in  45.  4  is  clearly  dis- 
tinguished from  Israel.  It  is  for  Israel's  sake 
that  he  is  called.  "He  shall  build  my  city," 
says  Jehovah,  "and  he  shall  let  my  exiles  go 
free"  (45.  13).  That  the  one  so  spoken  of  was 
250 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

Israel  itself,  is  certainly  in  the  highest  degree 
improbable.  Furthermore,  the  "ravenous  bird 
from  the  east"  in  46.  11  applies  more  naturally 
to  Cyrus  than  to  Israel.  The  same  is  also  true 
of  the  victorious  military  career  described  in 
41.  2,  3  and  45.  1-3.  As  an  offset  to  this,  it  is 
pointed  out  that  some  of  the  things  supposed  to 
have  been  said  of  Cyrus  are  found  also  in  pas- 
sages that  speak  of  Israel  (compare  45.  1  with 
41.  13).  But  this  is  characteristic  of  Deutero- 
Isaiah,  a  characteristic,  it  may  be  added,  that 
renders  especially  difficult  the  interpretation  of 
his  prophecies.  He  has  certain  fixed  formulas 
and  well-defined  ideas  that  he  applies  to  all  his 
characters,  no  matter  whether  he  is  speaking  of 
Jehovah,  of  Cyrus,  of  Israel,  or  of  the  Servant. 
The  result  is  that  it  is  often  no  easy  matter  to 
determine  whom  he  has  in  mind.  But  this  man- 
ifestly does  not  warrant  the  conclusion  that  they 
all  are  one  and  the  same  being. 

Another  consideration  that  has  no  little  weight 
in  this  connection  is  the  analogy  of  the  other 
prophets.  The  five  whom  we  have  studied  all 
found  their  inspiration  in  some  concrete  his- 
torical situation.  There  was  the  approach  of 
some  enemy — the  Assyrians,  Scythians,  or  Baby- 
lonians— and  the  consequent  threatened  destruc- 
tion of  Israel  or  Judah.  In  each  case  such  an 
impending  event  gave  wings  to  the  soul  of  the 
2^1 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

prophet.  This  makes  it  natural  to  look  for  some- 
thing similar  in  the  case  of  Deutero-Isaiah.  And 
such  a  situation  is  furnished  by  the  victorious 
career  of  Cyrus  and  the  approaching  fall  of 
Babylon.  For  upward  of  fifty  or  sixty  years 
the  Israelites  had  been  in  captivity.  But  lapse 
of  time  had  not  lessened  their  interest  in  the 
homeland.  Fast  days  were  regularly  observed 
(Zech.  8.  19;  7,  5),  commemorating  the  begin- 
ning of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  (2  Kings  25.  1), 
its  capture  (Jer.  39.  2),  its  destruction  (2  Kings 
25.  8f.),  and  the  assassination  of  Gedaliah  (Jer. 
41.  if.).  In  these  and  other  ways  the  people 
kept  alive  the  memory  of  the  sad  fate  that  had 
befallen  their  sacred  city,  and  also  stimulated 
the  hope  of  better  things  both  for  themselves 
and  for  the  desolate  land.  When,  therefore, 
Cyrus  appeared  upon  the  scene,  it  was  not  unnat- 
ural that  they  should  look  toward  him  with  more 
or  less  of  expectancy.  And  as  victory  after  vic- 
tory attended  his  steps,  as  Media,  Persia,  and 
Lydia  one  after  the  other  fell  under  his  sway, 
the  hope  must  have  risen  higher  and  higher  that 
here  at  last  was  their  expected  deliverer.  Under 
such  circumstances  it  would  seem  almost  inevit- 
able that  some  inspired  soul  must  have  mounted 
up  with  wings  as  eagles  and  announced  the  fall 
of  proud  Babylon  and  the  redemption  and  resto- 
ration of  the  chosen  people.  Certainly,  no  other 
252 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

occasion  in  Israel's  history  was  so  well  adapted 
to  call  forth  such  a  message.  It  may,  then,  in 
default  of  positive  disproof,  be  confidently  as- 
sumed that  we  have  here  the  actual  conditions 
under  which  Isaiah  40  to  55  was  written. 

It  would,  however,  be  a  serious  mistake  to 
suppose  that  Deutero-Isaiah's  message  consisted 
simply  in  the  announcement  of  Israel's  deliver- 
ance from  Babylon.  This  was  only  part  of  a 
larger  program.  "The  prophet,"  as  Davidson 
says,  "conceives  himself  to  be  standing  before  a 
restoration  that  is  final  and  universal."  The  end 
of  days  has  come  upon  him.  A  new  and  golden 
age  is  soon  to  dawn.  It  is  from  this  point  of 
view  that  the  marvelous  procession  of  the  re- 
deemed through  the  wilderness  is  to  be  under- 
stood. "Ye  shall  go  out,"  says  the  prophet, 
"with  joy,  and  be  led  forth  with  peace:  the 
mountains  and  the  hills  shall  break  forth  be- 
fore you  into  singing;  and  all  the  trees  of  the 
field  shall  clap  their  hands.  Instead  of  the  thorn 
shall  come  up  the  fir-tree;  and  instead  of  the 
brier  shall  come  up  the  myrtle  tree :  and  it  shall 
be  to  Jehovah  for  a  name,  for  an  everlasting 
sign  that  shall  not  be  cut  off"  (55.  12,  13;  com- 
pare 40.  3,  4;  41.  17-20;  43.  19-21).  From  the 
same  standpoint  also  we  are  to  understand  the 
description  of  the  new  Jerusalem.  "Behold," 
says   Jehovah,    "I   have   graven   thee   upon   the 

253 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

palms  of  my  hands ;  thy  walls  are  continually 
before  me.  .  .  .  O  thou  afflicted,  tossed  with  tem- 
pest, and  not  comforted,  I  will  set  thy  stones  in 
fair  colors,  and  lay  thy  foundations  with 
sapphires.  And  I  will  make  thy  pinnacles  of 
rubies,  and  thy  gates  of  carbuncles,  and  all  thy 
border  of  precious  stones"  (49.  16;  54.  II,  12). 
These  and  similar  utterances  of  the  prophet  are 
not  merely  rhetorical  extravagances.  They  ex- 
press a  vital  faith  on  his  part  in  the  coming  of  a 
new  heaven  and  a  new  earth. 

The  idea  of  the  approaching  end  of  the  pres- 
ent world-order  was  not  unknown  to  the  earlier 
prophets.  They  expected  before  long  a  won- 
derful and  final  manifestation  of  the  power  of 
Jehovah.  First,  there  was  to  be  a  general  judg- 
ment, and  then  there  was  to  be  a  renewal  and 
restoration  of  the  peoples  of  the  earth  under  the 
leadership  of  a  purified  Israel.  This  was  the 
form  the  idea  of  eternity  took  with  them.  And 
we  can  fully  understand  their  message  only  as 
we  bear  in  mind  this  general  background  of  their 
thought.  But  they  did  not  draw  so  sharp  a  con- 
trast between  the  new  and  the  old  as  does  Deu- 
tero-Isaiah.  They  did  not  grasp  so  clearly  as 
he  the  unideal  character  of  the  present  order, 
nor  did  they  see  so  plainly  as  he  the  antithesis 
between  the  temporal  and  the  eternal.  Hence, 
they  laid  no  such  stress  as  he  upon  the  eternity 

254 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

of  the  new  age.  "Israel,"  he  says,  "shall  be 
saved  by  Jehovah  with  an  everlasting  salva- 
tion. .  .  and  everlasting  joy  shall  be  upon  their 
heads"  (45.  17;  51.  11).  Hence,  also,  the 
change  to  which  they  looked  forward  was  far 
less  radical  than  that  which  he  describes.  "Lift 
up  your  eyes,"  he  says,  "to  the  heavens,  and 
look  upon  the  earth  beneath ;  for  the  heavens 
shall  vanish  away  like  smoke,  and  the  earth 
shall  wax  old  like  a  garment ;  and  they  that 
dwell  therein  shall  die  in  like  manner;  but  my 
salvation  shall  be  forever,  and  my  righteousness 
shall  not  be  abolished"  (51.  6).  This,  says 
Duhm,  is  "the  greatest  and  loftiest  thought  con- 
ceived before  Christianity."  It  is  not  equivalent 
to  the  Christian  idea  of  heaven,  for  individual 
immortality  is  not  yet  assured  (compare  65. 
20-22),  but  it  is  a  long  step  in  that  direction. 
And  a  century  or  two  later  the  goal  was  almost 
attained  when  an  inspired  seer,  as  he  contem- 
plated the  glorious  future,  cried  out,  "He  hath 
swallowed  up  death  forever;  and  the  Lord  Je- 
hovah will  wipe  away  tears  from  off  all  faces" 
(Isa.  25.  8). 

Passing  now  to  a  more  general  study  of  the 
teaching  of  Deutero-Isaiah,  we  are,  first  of  all, 
impressed  with  the  almost  complete  absence  of 
a  message  of  doom.     This  is  in  marked  con- 

255 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

trast  with  the  earlier  prophets,  and  was  due  to 
the  altered  circumstances  of  Deutero-Isaiah's 
ministry.  We  have  already  observed  the  effect 
which  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  had  upon  Ezekiel's 
preaching.  Previously  his  message  had  been  one 
chiefly  of  doom.  Thereafter  it  became  one  al- 
most exclusively  of  hope  and  consolation.  The 
reason  for  the  change  is  manifest;  and  it  was 
still  operative  in  the  time  of  Deutero-Isaiah. 
What  the  people  in  their  national  humiliation 
and  depression  of  spirit  needed  was  encourage- 
ment, not  rebuke.  But  this  does  not  mean  that 
the  prophet  took  no  account  of  their  shortcom- 
ings. He  reminds  them  again  and  again  that 
their  suffering  and  misfortune  have  been  the  re- 
sult of  their  own  sins  (42.  24!  ;  43.  27f. ;  50.  1 ). 
They  have  dealt  very  treacherously  from  the 
womb  (48.  8),  and  are  still  blind  and  deaf  (42. 
18).  Yea,  they  are  insincere,  obstinate,  and  even 
inclined  to  idolatry  (48.  1-5).  But  these  short- 
comings were  not  characteristic  of  the  people  as 
a  whole.  In  the  nation  as  such  the  prophet  had 
confidence.  They  were  to  be  redeemed  and  were 
to  be  "all  righteous"  (60.  21).  "Hearken  unto 
me,"  says  Jehovah,  "ye  that  know  righteousness, 
the  people  in  whose  heart  is  my  law;  fear  ye 
not  the  reproach  of  men,  neither  be  ye  dismayed 
at  their  revilings.  For  the  moth  shall  eat  them 
up  like  a  garment,  and  the  worm  shall  eat  them 
256 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALIS** 

like  wool ;  but  my  righteousness  shall  be  for- 
ever and  my  salvation  unto  all  generations" 
(51.  7,  8).  Deutero-Isaiah  was  not  an  individu- 
alist, but  it  is  evident  from  this  and  other  pas- 
sages that  he  distinguished  clearly  between  the 
fate  of  the  righteous  and  that  of  the  wicked. 
Certain  destruction  awaited  the  latter.  Baby- 
lon, therefore,  noted  for  its  oppression,  its  pride 
and  its  wickedness,  must  needs  go  down  into 
ruin  (chapter  47).  And  so  it  must  be  with  all 
that  oppose  the  will  of  Jehovah  (compare  57. 
20L ).  But  for  Israel  as  such  there  is  no  word 
of  doom.  The  unrighteousness  in  her  midst 
may  delay  the  day  of  her  redemption  (59.  1,  2), 
but  eventually  she  will  be  saved  with  an  ever- 
lasting salvation. 

The  element  of  hope  was  not  lacking  in  the 
earlier  prophets,  but  with  them  it  was  incidental 
or  followed  a  ministry  of  doom.  Here  it  is 
the  pervading  spirit  of  an  entire  ministry.  Deu- 
tero-Isaiah was  throughout  his  whole  career  a 
prophet  of  hope.  "Comfort  ye,  comfort  ye  my 
people,  saith  your  God.  Speak  ye  comfortably 
to  Jerusalem ;  and  cry  unto  her  that  her  warfare 
is  accomplished,  that  her  iniquity  is  pardoned, 
that  she  hath  received  of  Jehovah's  hand  double 
for  all  her  sins"  (40.  1,  2).  With  these  words 
he  began  his  prophetic  ministry  and  in  this  spirit 
he  continued  it  (compare  51.  3;  66.  13). 
257 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

Whether  61.  1-3  was  written  by  him  or  not,  and 
whether  it  referred  originally  to  him  or  the 
Servant,  it  nevertheless  expresses  truly  his  own 
aims :  "The  spirit  of  the  Lord  Jehovah  is  upon 
me;  because  Jehovah  hath  anointed  me  to  preach 
good  tidings  unto  the  meek;  he  hath  sent  me  to 
bind  up  the  broken-hearted,  to  proclaim  liberty 
to  the  captives,  and  the  opening  of  the  prison  to 
them  that  are  bound." 

The  true  function  of  religion,  according  to 
Deutero-Isaiah,  was  to  help  and  to  sustain  men. 
This  is  beautifully  expressed  by  a  contrast  drawn 
between  Jehovah  and  the  heathen  gods  (46. 
1-4).  The  latter  are  a  burden  to  those  that  wor- 
ship them.  Their  idols  are  carried  about  as  a 
load  on  the  backs  of  weary  beasts  and  they 
themselves  trail  helplessly  after  them.  Jehovah, 
on  the  other  hand,  has  been  a  sustaining  power 
to  his  people  through  all  their  history.  He  has 
borne  them  from  the  womb,  and  will  continue  to 
carry  them  even  to  old  age.  It  is  characteristic 
of  the  true  Deity  to  help  those  who  seek  his  aid. 
Jehovah,  therefore,  says  to  Israel,  "Fear  thou 
not,  for  I  am  with  thee;  be  not  dismayed,  for  I 
am  thy  God ;  I  will  strengthen  thee ;  yea,  I  will 
help  thee;  yea,  I  will  uphold  thee  with  the  right 
hand  of  my  righteousness.  .  .  .  When  thou  pass- 
est  through  the  waters,  I  will  be  with  thee;  and 
through  the  rivers,  they  shall  not  overflow  thee : 
258 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

when  thou  walkest  through  the  fire,  thou  shalt 
not  be  burned,  neither  shall  the  flame  kindle 
about  thee"  (41.  10;  43.  2).  Not  even  their 
sins  need  discourage  the  people  of  Israel,  for, 
says  Jehovah,  "I  have  blotted  out,  as  a  thick 
cloud,  thy  transgressions,  .  .  .  and  I  will  not  re- 
member thy  sins"  (44.  22;  43.  25).  In  these 
quotations  we  have  an  illustration  of  the  pre- 
vailing tone  of  Deutero-Isaiah's  prophecies. 
They  breathe  throughout  the  spirit  of  deep  sym- 
pathy and  tenderness.  What  is  said  of  the 
Servant,  that  he  would  not  break  the  bruised 
reed  nor  quench  the  dimly  smoking  wick 
(42.  3),  is  true  also  of  our  prophet.  The  Lord 
Jehovah  had  taught  him,  as  he  had  taught  the 
Servant,  "to  sustain  with  words  him  that  is 
weary"   (50.  4). 

The  message  of  hope  which  Deutero-Isaiah 
brought  to  his  contemporaries  was  first  an  an- 
nouncement of  the  restoration  of  the  exiles  from 
Babylon  and  from  the  four  quarters  of  the 
earth.  Their  return  will  far  exceed  the  marvels 
of  the  exodus  from  Egypt  (43.  16-21).  Every- 
where in  the  wilderness  rivers  and  fountains  are 
to  break  forth,  and  a  glorious  vegetation  is  to 
spring  up  (41.  18,  19;  43.  19).  Palestine  itself 
is  to  be  transformed  into  an  Eden  (51.  3),  and 
Zion,  in  surprise  at  the  number  of  her  children, 
will     ask,     "Who    hath    begotten    me    these?" 

259 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

(49.  21).  To  provide  for  them  she  will  be 
forced  to  enlarge  the  place  of  her  tent  and 
stretch  forth  the  curtains  of  her  habitations 
(54.  2).  But  the  restoration  is  not  to  consist 
simply  in  material  or  national  glory.  All  evil 
is  to  be  removed ;  there  is  to  be  no  more  violence 
or  destruction  in  the  land  (60.  18)  ;  sorrow  and 
sighing  are  to  flee  away  (51.  11)  ;  and  the  pres- 
ence of  Jehovah  is  to  be  enjoyed  in  all  its  full- 
ness. The  coming  salvation  is  to  exceed  what 
even  the  most  hopeful  might  ask  or  think,  "for 
my  thoughts  are  not  your  thoughts,  neither  are 
your  ways  my  ways,  saith  Jehovah.  For  as  the 
heavens  are  higher  than  the  earth,  so  are  my 
ways  higher  than  your  ways,  and  my  thoughts 
than  your  thoughts"  (55.  8,  9).  A  new  heav- 
ens and  a  new  earth  are  to  be  created,  "and  the 
former  things  shall  not  be  remembered,  nor 
come  into  mind"  (65.  17).  "The  sun  shall  be 
no  more  thy  light  by  day ;  neither  for  brightness 
shall  the  moon  give  light  unto  thee;  but  Jeho- 
vah will  be  unto  thee  an  everlasting  light,  and 
thy  God  thy  glory.  Thy  sun  shall  no  more  go 
down,  neither  shall  thy  moon  withdraw  itself ; 
for  Jehovah  will  be  thine  everlasting  light,  and 
the  days  of  thy  mourning  shall  be  ended"  (60. 
19,  20).  It  is  Israel  who  is  thus  addressed,  but 
the  blessings  of  the  new  age  are  not  to  be  con- 
fined to  one  nation.  The  ends  of  the  earth  are 
260 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

to  share  in  them  (45.  22).  Even  now  they 
are  offered  freely  to  all  men.  "Ho,  every  one 
that  thirsteth,  come  ye  to  the  waters,  and  he 
that  hath  no  money ;  come  ye,  buy  and  eat ;  yea, 
come,  buy  wine  and  milk,  without  money  and 
without  price.  Wherefore  do  ye  spend  money 
for  that  which  is  not  bread?  and  your  labor  for 
that  which  satisfieth  not?  hearken  diligently 
unto  me,  and  eat  ye  that  which  is  good,  and  let 
your  soul  delight  itself  in  fatness"  (55.  1,  2). 
Such  was  our  prophet's  message  to  the  people  of 
his  day.  No  wonder  that  he  is  called  "the  Evan- 
gelist of  the  Old  Testament" !  No  wonder  that 
his  book  is  termed  "the  Gospel  before  the  Gos- 
pel" ! 

The  most  significant  features,  however,  of 
Deutero-Isaiah's  teaching  remain  yet  to  be  con- 
sidered. And  the  best  way  to  approach  them  is 
to  take  up  the  four  main  characters  that  appear 
in  his  prophecies ;  Jehovah,  Cyrus,  Israel,  and 
the  Suffering  Servant.  The  central  figure  of 
the  book  is,  of  course,  Jehovah.  The  represen- 
tation of  him  here  given  does  not  differ  mate- 
rially from  that  found  in  the  preceding  prophets. 
But  as  Amos  laid  special  stress  on  the  righteous- 
ness of  God,  Hosea  on  his  love,  Isaiah  on  his 
sovereignty,  Jeremiah  on  his  intimate  relation 
to  the  soul  of  man,  and  Ezekiel  on  his  holiness, 
261 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

so  there  are  certain  aspects  of  the  divine  nature 
or  activity  that  Deutero-Isaiah  particularly  em- 
phasizes. Then,  too,  his  thought  is  more  devel- 
oped than  that  of  his  predecessors.  This  is 
quite  as  true  of  his  theology  as  of  his  escha- 
tology. 

What  seems  to  have  impressed  Deutero- 
Isaiah  most  in  connection  with  Jehovah  was  his 
work  as  Creator.  He  is  the  one  "that  maketh 
all  things;  that  stretcheth  forth  the  heavens 
alone;  that  spreadeth  abroad  the  earth"  (44. 
24).  Expressions  similar  to  this  occur  again 
and  again  (42.  5;  45.  12,  18;  48.  13;  51.  13). 
And  some  of  the  finest  passages  in  the  book  re- 
fer to  this  aspect  of  the  divine  activity :  "Who 
hath  measured  the  waters  in  the  hollow  of  his 
hand,  and  meted  out  heaven  with  the  span,  and 
comprehended  the  dust  of  the  earth  in  a  meas- 
ure, and  weighed  the  mountains  in  scales, 
and  the  hills  in  a  balance?  Who  hath  di- 
rected the  Spirit  of  Jehovah,  or  being  his 
counselor  hath  taught  him?  With  whom 
took  he  counsel,  and  who  instructed  him, 
and  taught  him  in  the  path  of  justice,  and 
taught  him  knowledge,  and  showed  to  him  the 
way  of  understanding?...  Lift  up  your  eyes 
on  high,  and  see:  who  hath  created  these?  he 
that  bringeth  out  their  host  by  number,  that 
calleth  them  all  by  name;  for  fear  of  him  who 
262 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

is  of  great  might  and  strong  power,  not  one  is 
lacking"  (40.  12-14,  26). 

Along  with  this  idea  of  the  creative  power 
of  Jehovah  went  naturally  the  thought  of  his 
eternity,  his  transcendence,  and  his  sole  God- 
head. "The  grass  withereth,  the  flower  fadeth; 
but  the  word  of  our  God  shall  stand  forever" 
(40.  8).  Jehovah  is  "the  everlasting  God"  (40. 
28).  He  is  the  first  and  also  the  last  (48.  12). 
He  is  "the  high  and  lofty  One  that  inhabiteth 
eternity"  (57.  15).  "It  is  he  that  sitteth  above 
the  circle  of  the  earth,  and  the  inhabitants 
thereof  are  as  grasshoppers ;  that  stretcheth  out 
the  heavens  as  a  curtain,  and  spreadeth  them 
out  as  a  tent  to  dwell  in;  that  bringeth  princes 
to  nothing;  that  maketh  the  judges  of  the  earth 
as  vanity"  (40.  22,  23).  Nothing  earthly  can 
compare  with  him:  "Behold,  the  nations  are 
as  a  drop  of  a  bucket,  and  are  accounted  as  the 
small  dust  of  the  balance:  behold,  he  taketh  up 
the  isles  as  a  very  little  thing.  And  Lebanon 
is  not  sufficient  to  burn,  nor  the  beasts  thereof 
sufficient  for  a  burnt  offering.  All  the  nations 
are  as  nothing  before  him;  they  are  accounted 
by  him  as  less  than  nothing,  and  vanity"  (40. 
15-17).  How  absurd,  then,  is  all  idolatry! 
How  foolish  the  attempt  to  construct  a  likeness 
to  God!  (40.  18-20;  41.  6,  7;  44.  9-20;  45.  20; 
46.  1,  2,  5-7).  The  only  way  to  account  for 
263 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

these  attempts  is  to  ascribe  them  to  a  strange 
infatuation  of  the  human  heart  (44.  17-20),  for 
the  idols  are  nothing  and  can  do  nothing  (41. 
23,  24).  There  is  no  God  but  Jehovah:  "I  am 
Jehovah,  and  there  is  none  else;  besides  me  there 
is  no  God. .  . .  Before  me  there  was  no  God 
formed,  neither  shall  there  be  after  me.  I,  even 
I,  am  Jehovah;  and  besides  me  there  is  no 
saviour.  ...  I  am  God,  and  there  is  none  else.  .  .  . 
I  am  the  first,  and  I  am  the  last;  and  besides 
me  there  is  no  God"  (45.  5;  43.  10,  11;  45. 
22;  44.  6).  Thus  Jehovah  is  represented  as 
asserting  again  and  again  his  sole  deity.  In 
earlier  times  this  had  not  been  necessary.  The 
people  then  stood  apart  to  a  large  extent  from 
the  great  heathen  world.  But  the  exile  wrought 
a  radical  change.  It  exposed  them  to  all  the 
perils  of  a  heathen  environment.  There  was 
danger  of  their  being  overawed  by  the  civiliza- 
tion about  them.  There  was  danger  of  defec- 
tion to  false  faiths.  It  was,  therefore,  impera- 
tive that  they  realized  the  fact  that  Jehovah,  and 
he  alone,  is  God,  and  that  all  other  gods  are  non- 
entities. This  was  no  new  truth.  It  had  been 
implicit  in  Israel's  religion  from  the  beginning, 
but  it  now  needed  to  be  made  explicit.  It 
needed  to  become  a  conscious  article  of  faith; 
and  such  it  is  in  Deutero-Isaiah.  Here  we  have 
absolute  monotheism,  and  we  have  it  so  clearly 
264 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

and  emphatically  expressed  that  there  can  be  no 
doubt  about  it. 

This,  then,  is  the  conception  of  Jehovah  that 
is  most  prominent  with  our  prophet.  He  is  sole 
Deity,  the  eternal  and  transcendent  Creator  of 
heaven  and  earth.  But  there  is  another  side  to 
his  nature :  he  is  also  a  God  of  grace.  How  im- 
pressively and  persuasively  this  thought  is  ex- 
pressed, has  already  appeared  in  our  discussion 
of  the  prophet's  message  of  hope.  In  this  con- 
nection only  one  additional  point  calls  for  atten- 
tion. Salvation  is  by  Deutero-Isaiah  regularly 
carried  back  to  the  divine  righteousness.  These 
two  terms,  instead  of  being  opposed  to  each 
other,  are  used  almost  synonymously.  "My 
righteousness,"  says  Jehovah,  "is  near,  my  sal- 
vation is  gone  forth"  (51.  5).  "My  righteous- 
ness shall  be  forever,  and  my  salvation  unto  all 
generations"  (51.  8).  Jehovah  is  "a  righteous 
God  and  a  Saviour"  (45.  21).  This  use  of  the 
word  "righteous"  or  "righteousness"  is  com- 
monly explained  by  saying  that  Jehovah  stood 
in  a  covenant  relation  to  Israel,  and  so  was  mor- 
ally bound  to  be  true  to  that  relation  and  to  save 
his  people.  But  there  are  some  passages  in 
which  his  righteousness  is  represented  as  initiat- 
ing the  covenant  with  Israel  (42.  6,  21),  and 
also  as  leading  to  the  salvation  of  all  mankind 
(51.  5).  It  would  seem,  then,  that  a  profounder 
265 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

meaning  must  have  underlain  these  statements 
with  reference  to  the  divine  righteousness.  And 
may  it  not  have  been  this?  God  is  not  an  irre- 
sponsible despot.  He  is  the  Creator  and  Father 
of  all  (compare  63.  16).  He  is,  therefore,  like 
any  human  parent — under  obligation  to  his  chil- 
dren. He  is  morally  bound  to  do  all  he  can  to 
save  them.  His  righteousness,  instead  of  acting 
as  a  bar  to  the  salvation  of  men,  leads  inevitably 
to  it.  God  would  not  be  true  to  himself  as  a 
moral  being  if  he  did  not  do  everything  within 
his  power  to  bring  about  the  redemption  of  men. 
This  truth  was  probably  not  conceived  so  clearly 
by  Deutero-Isaiah  as  it  is  here  expressed.  But 
some  such  idea  was  involved  in  his  conception  of 
the  divine  righteousness.  And  this  idea,  it  may 
be  added,  forms  the  true  basis  of  the  Christian 
doctrines  of  the  incarnation  and  the  atonement. 
Jehovah  is  the  efficient  cause  of  all  things. 
"I,"  he  says,  "form  the  light,  and  create  dark- 
ness; I  make  peace  and  create  evil"  (45.  7). 
Still,  he  was  under  the  necessity  of  using  human 
instruments.  Of  these,  two  are  prominent  in 
Deutero-Isaiah — Cyrus  and  the  Servant.  The 
use  of  a  foreigner  to  further  the  purposes  of 
Jehovah  was  not  unknown  to  the  earlier  proph- 
ets. Isaiah  speaks  of  the  Assyrian  king,  prob- 
ably Sennacherib,  as  the  rod  of  Jehovah's  anger 
and  the  staff  of  his  indignation  (10.  5).  And 
266 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

Jeremiah  refers  several  times  to  Nebuchadrez- 
zar as  the  servant  of  Jehovah  (25.  9;  27.  6; 
43.  10).  But  Cyrus  is  here  represented  as  stand- 
ing in  a  more  intimate  relation  to  Jehovah  than 
any  preceding  heathen  ruler.  He  is  Jehovah's 
"shepherd"  (44.  28),  "his  anointed"  (45.  1), 
the  one  "whom  Jehovah  loveth"  (48.  14).  Not 
only  is  he  to  let  the  exiles  go  free  and  to  rebuild 
Jerusalem  (45.  13),  he  is  himself  to  become  a 
worshiper  of  Jehovah  (41.  25),  and  to  be  the 
means  of  bringing  about  the  universal  recogni- 
tion of  the  true  religion  (45.  5,  6).  How  our 
prophet  could  have  come  to  entertain  such  high 
hopes  of  Cyrus  has  been  the  subject  of  much 
speculation.  Stress  has  been  laid  on  the  fact 
that  Cyrus  was  a  Persian.  This,  it  is  thought, 
may  have  led  the  prophet  to  believe  that  he  was 
a  Zoroastrian  and  so  in  sympathy  with  mono- 
theism. But  there  is  nothing  in  the  official  docu- 
ments that  have  come  down  to  us  to  support  this 
view.  Cyrus,  it  appears,  was  a  polytheist ;  and, 
if  he  ever  accorded  Jehovah  any  recognition,  it 
was  simply  as  one  among  many  gods.  In  the  light 
of  this  fact,  the  view  of  him  here  expressed 
must  be  ascribed,  in  part  at  least,  to  the  proph- 
et's idealism.  Cyrus  as  the  anointed  of  Jehovah 
far  surpassed  the  historic  reality. 

Before  taking  up  the  prophet's  conception  of 
the  Suffering  Servant  a  word  is  necessary  con- 
267 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

cerning  the  people  of  Israel  as  depicted  outside 
of  the  Servant-passages.  They  are  addressed 
and  spoken  of  as  the  servant  of  Jehovah  (41. 
8f. ;  43.  10;  44.  if.;  45.  4;  48.  10).  But  they 
appear  chiefly  in  a  passive  or  receptive  attitude. 
They  are  the  subject  of  redemption  rather  than 
themselves  a  redemptive  agency.  They  have 
been  "called"  by  Jehovah  (41.  9) ;  he  is  to  pour 
his  Spirit  upon  them  (44.  3)  ;  and  they  are  to  be 
his  witnesses  (43.  10;  44.  8).  But  no  definite 
vocation  is  ascribed  to  them.  They  are  blind 
and  unresponsive  (42.  18-20).  They  have 
sinned  and  are  being  punished  for  their  sins 
(42.  24L ).  They  are  a  people  robbed  and  plun- 
dered (42.  22).  So  severe  are  their  afflictions 
that  they  feel  that  the  justice  due  them  has 
passed  away  from  their  God  (40.  2j),  and  that 
he  has  forgotten  them  (49.  14).  There  is  now, 
however,  to  be  a  change  in  their  fortunes  (43.  1 ; 
44.  1).  Their  iniquity  has  been  pardoned,  they 
have  received  double  for  all  their  sins  (40.  2; 
compare  47.  6),  and  are  henceforth  to  be  the 
recipients  of  the  divine  favor  in  abundant  meas- 
ure. Heathen  peoples  are  to  be  given  as  a  ran- 
som for  them  (43.  3)  ;  and  they  are  to  enjoy  the 
sure  mercies  of  David  (55.  3).  Instead  of  being 
forced  to  do  the  bidding  of  foreign  conquerors, 
other  nations  are  to  run  to  them  (55.  5)  and  to 
bow  down  before  them  (45.  14;  49.  22L). 
268 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

This  representation  of  the  Servant  Israel  dif- 
fers so  strikingly  from  that  of  the  Servant  found 
in  four  or  five  passages  (42.  1-7;  49.  i~9a;  50. 
4-9;  52.  13  to  53.  12;  and  possibly  61.  1-3)  that 
the  latter  are  commonly  separated  from  the  rest 
of  the  book  and  called  as  above  the  Servant-pas- 
sages. These  prophecies  are  the  most  important 
and  the  most  difficult  in  the  book.  The  utmost 
diversity  of  opinion  prevails  with  reference  to 
their  origin  and  interpretation.  "I  should  like," 
says  Cornill,  "to  see  the  man  whose  head  would 
not  spin  around  like  a  top  from  surveying  these 
opinions,  which  run  through  all  possible  permu- 
tations, and  contradict  one  .another  at  all  con- 
ceivable points."  The  controversy  centers  about 
two  main  questions :  were  these  passages  writ- 
ten by  Deutero-Isaiah  or  not  ?  and  is  the  Servant 
here  referred  to  to  be  interpreted  collectively  or 
as  an  individual?  The  arguments  in  favor  of 
assigning  the  passages  to  another  hand  are  not 
especially  strong.  Those  based  on  rhythm  and 
style  have  no  independent  force ;  and  those  based 
on  content  do  not  take  adequate  account  of  the 
points  of  contact  between  the  Servant-passages 
and  the  rest  of  the  book.  Viewed  in  the  large, 
these  prophecies  seem  necessary  to  complete  the 
teaching  of  Deutero-Isaiah.  As  Cyrus  is  the  hu- 
man instrument  of  Israel's  external  redemption, 
so  it  seems  natural  there  should  be  a  human 
269 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

agent  through  whom  her  inward  or  moral  re- 
newal is  affected.  And  this  we  have  in  the  Suf- 
fering Servant.  Then  too  these  passages  con- 
tain the  richest  religious  thought  of  the  whole 
book,  and  throw  a  new  light  over  all  the  other 
prophecies.  To  eliminate  them  would  be,  as 
Budde  says,  "to  gouge  out  the  eyes  of  the  book." 

The  other  question  is  a  more  difficult  one. 
The  Suffering  Servant  is  at  first  sight  depicted 
as  though  he  were  an  individual.  There  are,  for 
instance,  several  passages  that  seem  to  dis- 
tinguish him  clearly  from  Israel.  In  them  we 
read  that  he  is  to  be  "a  covenant  of  the  people" 
(42.  6;  49.  6) ;  he  has  been  cut  off  because  of 
the  transgression  of  "my  people"  (53.  8)  ;  and 
he  is  "to  raise  up  the  tribes  of  Jacob  and  to  re- 
store the  preserved  of  Israel"  (49.  6;  compare 
50.  10).  But,  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  one 
verse  in  which  he  is  directly  identified  with  Is- 
rael (49.  3).  And  this,  it  will  have  to  be  ad- 
mitted, is  the  view  favored  by  the  context  as  a 
whole.  For  in  the  rest  of  the  book  the  Servant 
is  Israel.  It  seems,  then,  only  natural  to  hold 
that  he  is  such  in  the  Servant-passages  also, 
since  there  is  no  statement  anywhere  to  the  con- 
trary. 

These  apparently  contradictory  phenomena 
naturally  raise  the  question  as  to  whether  there 
is  any  way  of  accounting  for  both  sets  of  facts. 
270 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

An  interesting  and  ingenious  attempt  in  this  di- 
rection has  recently  been  made  by  Professor 
Sellin.  He  holds  that  the  Servant-passages  were 
written  by  Deutero-Isaiah  about  B.  C.  560,  and 
that  they  referred  originally  to  Jehoiachin,  who 
that  year  was  released  from  prison  after  thirty- 
seven  years  of  rigorous  confinement,  and  ele- 
vated to  a  position  above  that  of  "the  kings  who 
were  with  him  in  Babylon"  (2  Kings  25.  27-30). 
This  release  of  Jehoiachin,  who  was  of  the  Da- 
vidic  line,  awakened,  it  is  thought,  the  hope  that 
the  Messianic  expectations  of  the  nation  would 
be  realized  in  him.  Deutero-Isaiah  conse- 
quently idealized  his  life,  and  interpreted  his 
suffering  and  virtual  death  during  the  long  years 
of  his  imprisonment  as  an  atonement  for  the  sins 
of  the  people.  This  was  a  new  and  higher  con- 
ception of  the  Messiah,  and  represents  a  very 
important  development  in  Old  Testament 
thought.  But  the  newly  awakened  Messianic 
hope  was  not  destined  to  be  fulfilled.  Jehoiachin 
probably  died  a  few  years  after  his  release. 
When,  then,  twenty  years  later,  Cyrus  appeared 
upon  the  scene  and  the  deliverance  of  Israel 
seemed  near,  the  prophet  transferred  to  the  peo- 
ple the  Messianic  ideal  previously  connected  with 
Jehoiachin  (compare  55.  3-5).  But  in  so  doing 
he  did  not  prepare  a  new  set  of  prophecies.  He 
retained  the  old  ones  practically  unchanged, 
271 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

simply  putting  them  in  a  context  which  made 
them  refer  to  the  nation  rather  than  an  indi- 
vidual. It  was  not,  however,  actual  Israel  to 
whom  he  applied  them  any  more  than  it  was  the 
actual  Jehoiachin  who  was  originally  described 
by  them.  It  was  Israel  from  the  ideal  point  of 
view,  Israel  as  the  representative  of  Jehovah's 
redemptive  purpose. 

Whether  this  theory  be  correct  or  not,  it  at 
least  has  the  value  of  emphasizing  the  Messianic 
character  of  the  Suffering  Servant.  It  has  been 
customary  in  recent  years  to  deny  that  the 
Servant  was  in  any  proper  sense  of  the  term  a 
Messianic  figure.  Cyrus,  according  to  Deutero- 
Isaiah,  was  the  "anointed"  one,  the  Messiah 
(45.  1).  But  this  is  a  very  superficial  and  me- 
chanical view  to  take  of  the  subject.  The  Mes- 
siah in  his  essential  nature  was  the  ideal  person- 
age through  whom  the  kingdom  of  God  was  to 
be  introduced  into  the  world.  And  in  this* sense 
the  Suffering  Servant  is  as  truly  Messianic  as 
any  royal  character  referred  to  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament. It  is,  then,  just  as  proper  to  see  in 
Isaiah  53  a  reference  to  the  life  of  Christ  as  it 
is  to  find  it  in  any  other  Old  Testament  passage, 
for,  no  matter  to  whom  the  Suffering  Servant 
may  have  originally  referred,  he  was,  in  any 
case,  an  ideal  figure.  And  every  ideal  sincerely 
believed  in  is  a  prophecy.  That  he  is  not  called 
272 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

the  Messiah,  and  that  he  is  spoken  of  as  though 
he  were  already  present,  has  no  significance  as 
against  this  deeper  view. 

Nowhere  in  the  Old  Testament  have  we  such 
a  lofty  religious  ideal  as  in  the  Suffering 
Servant.  Not  only  did  he  have  the  high  and 
almost  unique  mission  of  being  a  light  to  the 
Gentiles  (49.  6),  not  only  was  he  tender  and 
sympathetic  in  nature  (42.  3),  not  only  was  he 
persistent  in  the  face  of  discouragement  (42.  4; 
49.  4;  50.  yi.),  not  only  was  he  patient  in  tribu- 
lation (50.  6;  53.  7)  ;  his  life  was  a  sacrifice  for 
the  sins  of  others,  and  a  sacrifice  voluntarily 
borne.  Men  esteemed  him  stricken,  smitten  of 
God,  and  afflicted.  But  it  was  for  their  trans- 
gressions that  he  was  wounded,  for  their  iniqui- 
ties that  he  was  bruised.  The  chastisement  of 
their  peace  was  upon  him,  and  with  his  stripes 
they  were  healed.  Jehovah  laid  on  him  the  iniq- 
uity of  them  all  (53.  4-6).  This  was  the  di- 
vinely chosen  method  of  redeeming  Israel  and 
of  redeeming  the  world.  Through  the  suffering 
and  final  exaltation  of  the  innocent  Servant  the 
divine  justice  and  love  were  to  be  so  exhibited 
that  men  would  acknowledge  their  guilt  and 
turn  in  penitence  to  God.  In  this  conception  we 
have  the  high-water  mark  of  Old  Testament 
spirituality.  And  there  is  nothing  superior  to  it 
in  the  New  Testament.     The  only  difference  is 

273 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

that  what  remained  a  pure  ideal  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament became  an  actuality  in  the  New. 


But  remarkable  as  is  Deutero-Isaiah's  concep- 
tion of  vicarious  suffering,  there  is  another  ele- 
ment in  his  teaching  that  may  properly  be  re- 
garded as  a  more  important  contribution  to  the 
development  of  prophecy.  This  is  his  univer- 
salism.  Israel's  religion  is  to  become  the  re- 
ligion of  the  world.  Jeremiah,  as  we  saw,  stood 
at  the  threshold  of  this  great  thought,  but  did 
not  make  it  a  vital  part  of  his  message.  Ezekiel 
in  one  instance  (16.  53-63)  speaks  of  the  resto- 
ration and  redemption  of  the  heathen  world  sym- 
bolized as  Sodom,  but,  as  a  rule,  manifests  the 
particularism  of  a  Jewish  priest.  Isaiah  had 
occasional  visions  of  Jerusalem  as  the  religious 
center  of  the  world  (2.  2-4),  but  this  with  him 
could  in  the  nature  of  the  case  be  only  a  hope 
for  the  more  or  less  distant  future.  So  long  as 
the  nation  was  struggling  for  its  life,  there  was 
manifestly  no  place  for  missionary  activity. 
This  could  arise  only  after  the  state  had  fallen 
and  the  people  had  come  into  more  intimate  con- 
tact with  the  heathen  world.  Our  prophet  was 
consequently  the  first  to  express  clearly  and  em- 
phatically the  idea  of  Israel's  mission  to  the 
world.  And  along  with  this  went  naturally  the 
thought   that   the   religion   of   Jehovah   was   in- 

274 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

tended  for  all  men.  All  peoples  were  to  share 
in  his  salvation.  Deutero-Isaiah,  therefore,  is 
fittingly  termed  the  prophet  of  universalism. 

This,  however,  does  not  mean  that  there  are 
no  traces  of  particularism  in  his  prophecies.  In 
spite  of  all  his  breadth  he  was  still  an  intense 
nationalist.  He  looked  upon  Israel  as  the  spe- 
cial object  of  Jehovah's  care.  And  this  led  him 
at  times  to  take  what  looks  like  an  ungenerous 
and  even  hostile  attitude  toward  the  heathen. 
Jehovah,  for  instance,  says  to  Israel:  "They 
shall  bring  thy  sons  in  their  bosom,  and  thy 
daughters  shall  be  carried  upon  their  shoulders. 
And  kings  shall  be  thy  nursing  fathers,  and 
queens  thy  nursing  mothers :  they  shall  bow 
down  to  thee  with  their  faces  to  the  earth,  and 
lick  the  dust  of  thy  feet"  (49.  22,  23 ;  compare 
61.  5,  6).  He  also  adds:  "I  will  feed  them 
that  oppress  thee  with  their  own  flesh ;  and  they 
shall  be  drunken  with  their  own  blood,  as  with 
sweet  wine"  (49.  26).  With  this  may  be  com- 
pared the  powerful  figure  of  Jehovah  in  63.  1-6. 
"Who  is  this,"  asks  some  one,  "that  cometh  from 
Edom,  with  dyed  garments  from  Bozrah?" 
And  the  answer  is,  Jehovah,  who  has  trodden 
down  the  peoples  in  his  anger,  and  stained  all 
his  raiment  with  their  lifeblood. 

But  such  passages  as  these  do  not  represent 
the  real  attitude  of  Deutero-Isaiah.     They  are, 

275 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 

rather,  traditional  eschatological  material  which 
has  been  adopted  without  being  fully  assimilated. 
His  true  position  with  regard  to  the  heathen 
appears  in  his  teaching  concerning  the  Servant, 
Cyrus,  and  Jehovah.  The  Servant  is  to  bring 
forth  justice  to  the  Gentiles,  and  the  isles  are  to 
wait  for  his  law.  He  is  to  be  a  light  to  the  na- 
tions, and  Jehovah's  salvation  to  the  end  of  the 
earth.  His  sufferings  also  are  to  avail  for  the 
heathen.  It  is  they,  as  well  as  the  guilty  Israel- 
ites, who  are  represented  as  saying,  "All  we  like 
sheep  have  gone  stray ;  we  have  turned  everyone 
to  his  own  way;  and  Jehovah  hath  laid  on  him 
the  iniquity  of  us  all"  (53.  6).  The  redemption 
of  the  heathen  is,  therefore,  the  chief  aim  of 
the  Servant,  and  the  Servant-nation  Israel.  Is- 
rael's history  is  not  an  end  in  itself,  but  simply  a 
means  by  which  to  bring  about  the  salvation  of 
the  world.  And  so  it  is  also  with  Cyrus.  "I 
will  gird  thee,"  says  Jehovah,  "though  thou  hast 
not  known  me;  that  they  may  know  from  the 
rising  of  the  sun,  and  from  the  west,  that  there 
is  none  besides  me;  I  am  Jehovah,  and  there  is 
none  else"  (45.  5,  6).  All  human  history  has 
thus  for  its  climax  the  universal  knowledge  of 
the  true  God.  Every  important  idea  in  the  book 
points  toward  this  culmination.  The  sole  deity 
of  Jehovah,  the  nothingness  of  the  idols,  the 
sufferings  and  exaltation  of  the  Servant,  the 
276 


THE  PROPHET  OF  UNIVERSALISM 

career  of  Cyrus,  the  approaching  parousia — all 
these  conceptions  look  forward  to  the  time  when 
the  knowledge  of  God  shall  cover  the  earth  as 
the  waters  cover  the  sea.  It  is,  then,  in  line 
with  the  teaching  of  the  book  as  a  whole,  when 
Jehovah  says :  "A  law  shall  go  forth  from  me, 
and  I  will  establish  my  justice  for  a  light  of  the 
peoples.  My  righteousness  is  near,  my  salvation 
is  gone  forth,  and  mine  arms  shall  judge  the  peo- 
ples ;  the  isles  shall  wait  for  me,  and  on  mine 
arm  shall  they  trust.  .  .  .  Look  unto  me,  and  be 
ye  saved,  all  the  ends  of  the  earth;  for  I  am  Ged, 
and  there  is  none  else.  By  myself  have  I  sworn, 
the  word  has  gone  forth  from  my  mouth  in 
righteousness,  and  shall  not  return,  that  unto  me 
every  knee  shall  bow,  every  tongue  shall  swear" 
(51.  4,  5;  45.  22,  23).  These  utterances  repre- 
sent the  zenith  of  the  prophetic  conception  of 
redemption.  They  imply  that  the  true  house  of 
Jehovah  will  henceforth  be  "a  house  of  prayer 
for  all  peoples"  (56.  7)  ;  and  they  also  point 
forward  to  the  time  when  it  shall  be  said  that 
"there  is  neither  Greek  nor  Jew,  circumcision 
nor  uncircumcision,  Barbarian,  Scythian,  bond 
nor  free:  but  Christ  is  all,  and  in  all"  (Col. 
3-  ")■ 


277 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  PASSAGES 


Genesis  page 

18.25 238 

44-5 32 

49.  8-12 6 

Exodus 

7-1 30 

Numbers 

12.6-8 33,  36 

23  and  24 5 

24-4 34 

Deuteronomy 

13-  1-3 36 

18.  9-18 39 

18.  15,  18 11 

1  Samuel 

7  and  8 13 

9-6 29,  34 

9-9 13.  29 

10.  5-13 2 

15 13.  15 

18.  10 2 

19.  18-24 14 

2  Samuel 

7-8-16 5 

12 16 

24 15 

1  Kings 

11.  29s 16,  221 

18.13 6 

18.  16-46 16 

18.25-29 3 

19.  1-18 16 

19.  18 156 

21 16 

22.  5ff 6,  8,  10 

2/ 


2  Kings  page 

4.  1-7,  38-41 6 

5-  20ff 8 

9-  " 2,  34 

14-  5.  6 238 

24-1 173 

25-  27-30 271 

Nehemiah 

6.  10-14 2 

Psalms 

74-9 28 

Isaiah 

1.  11-17 148 

1.  18 149 

1-26 159 

2.2-4 159,274 

2-6 39,  147 

2.  12 146 

4-2-6 159 

5-  8-23 148 

6 128 

7-  1-13 135 

7-3 127,  156 

7-4,9 151 

7.  14-17 160 

8.  16 158 

8-  17 155 

8.  18 127,  156 

9.  2-7 160 

10.  5-7 141,  266 

11.  1-9 160 

18.4 153 

22.  1-14 139 

22.  4 140,  148 

25-8 255 

28.  7-13 138 


78 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  PASSAGES 

Isaiah                               page  Isaiah                               page 

28.  12 152  60.  19,  20 260 

28.  15 6,  69,  146  61.  1-3 258,  269 

28,  16 152,  156  63.  1-6 275 

29-  13 147 

J?'?!- «  Jeremiah 

3i-3 129,  137  1.5 170,  171 

32.  1-5 160  1.  10 185 

40  to  66 27,  144,  240  4.  3,  4 178,  190 

40.  I,  2 257  4.  19-21 195 

40.  8,  12-14,  15-17 263  4.  23-26 186 

41.  2-4 247,  251  6.  7 190 

41.  25 267  6.  16 23,  200 

42.  1-7 269  6.  20 178 

42.  6 265,  270  7 180,  189 

42.  241 256,  268  7.  4,  II,  21,  22.  .  .  178,  179 

43-  2 259  8.  7 189 

44-22 259  8.8 177 

44.  24 262  8.  18;  9.  1 195 

44.  28. .  .  241,  247,  250,  267  9.  21,  22 187,  196 

45.  1 250,  267,  272  10.  23 190 

45-5 264,  267,  276  11.  1-14 177,  179 

45-13 250,  267  12.  1 205 

45-17 255  13.  i-ii ioo,  220 

45-21 265  13.  16 187 

45-22 261,  264  13-23 190 

46.  1,2 241,  248,  263  15.  10 197 

46.  1-4 258  15.  17 196 

46.  11 247,251  15.  18,  19 199 

47 241,  248,  257  16.  19,  20 194 

49  to  55 247  17.  1 188 

49.  i~9a 269  17.  14,  17 200 

49-  3.  6 270,  273  19.  iff 180 

49.  22,  26 275  20.  9 199 

50.  4-9 269  20.  14-18 197 

5i-  4.  5 265,  277  22.  15,  16 177 

5i-6 255  23.  5,  6 193 

51-  7,  8 257,  265  24 182,  233 

52.  5.  11 244  26.  20-23 9,  180 

53 269  28 10,  182,  188,  221 

53-6 276  28.  8 171,  185 

54-  11,  12 254  31.  29,  30 194 

55-  1,2 261  31.  31-34 193 

55-8,9 260  32.  6-15 192,221 

55-  12,  13 253  36 181,  184 

56  to  66 .243,  247  42.  7 42 

279 


THE  BEACON  LIGHTS  OF  PROPHECY 


Esekiel  page 

i  to  3 208 

2.  1-7 213 

2.  8ff 220,  224 

3-  15 216,223 

3-  16-21 214,235 

3.  25,  26 216,  222 

4.  1-3 220 

4.  4-8 216,  218,  219 

4.  9-17 220 

4.  14 202,  211 

5.  i~4a 220,  221 

7-2-4 225 

n.  13 212,  216 

11.  14-21 232 

12.  1-7 220 

14.  9 10 

14.  12-20 235 

16.  3 227 

16.  53-63 228,  274 

16.  63 218 

18.  1-32 235 

18.  2 223,  228 

18.  25 212,  223 

20.  32 228 

21.  6,  7,  18-23 220 

24.  1-14,  15-24..  .207,  220 

24.  25-27 218,  222 

29.  21 218 

33-  1-20 235 

33-  10 228 

33-  11 213,  239 

33-  21,  22 217 

33.  23-29 232 

33-  32 224 

34  to  37 213,  229,  231 

34.  10,  16,  23,  28.  ..231,  232 

36.  i6ff 211 

36.  20-23 233 

36.  25-27 234 

37.  11 223,  228 

37-22,27 232 

38  and  39 225,  229 

40  to  48 202,  215,  230 

Hosea 

1  to  3 104 

280 


Hosea 


PAGE 


I.  2 IOI 

I-  3,  8 99 

I.  IO  to  2.  I 121 

1.  II 122,  124 

2.  5.  7.  12 114 

2.  15 12,  121 

2.  19 121 

2.  23 122 

3-  I 95,  119 

4-  1,  2 in 

4-3 108 

4-  8,9 96,97 

5-4 112,  118,  120 

5-6 112 

5-13 115.  120 

6.  1,4 118,  119 

6.  6 112,  118,  149 

7-5 94 

7-  11 115 

8-3 117 

8.  13 66,  108,  112,  115 

9-  7.8 2,34,97 

9.  15 107,  120,  122 

11.  1-4 120 

11.  8,  10,  11 120,  121 

12.  7,  8 no 

12.  13 n 

13-  11 117 

13-  13 119 

13.  14 107,  120 

14.  4 122 


Amos 


2 71 

4,5 61 

2 61,  71,  77,  162 

7 3o 

8 65 

9-12 66 

12 69 

4 71,79 

6-11 65,  86 

13 61 

2 75 

4-6;  14-  15 

70,  83,  87,  156 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  PASSAGES 

Amos                                 page  Matthew                           page 

5-  8,  9 6o  i.  23 160 

5-  18 6,  69,  74,  162  16.  14 20X 

5.  21-24 80,  149 

6.  iff 62,  74 

6.  9,  10 72      Luke 

6.  12 82 

6.  14 62 

7-  10-17 63 

9-2-4 70,  75 

9.  5,  6 60      Colossians 

9-7 78 

9-8-15 84 

Micah 

,    _  „   fi      Hebrews 

3-5 7»  8 

6.  6-8 26,  149  11.  10 164 


15-  10 239 

22.  20 201 


3-  11 277 


281 


Date  Due 

^  i  1  :H 

••t 

JUN44 

i—**" 

h  21  ga 

« 

•ik;    "tif  1>"  ,.*v 

da  3u  *t 

»0E5  '52 

J«  2  4  '40 

2M&[c* 

? 

v 

-     ■/! 

H 

A 

ftfOlOSS 

1, 

■ 

"mUL6  '6 

i 

- 

•* 

" 

jNMMh^W^ 

■9» 

e../PpM^^j 

£I^"J!J-i!J  ""'"" 

Hr  *-*  m 

9 

!uuoLll{UllHlillIulI(UiKi]llIuEIIttlliIlllnlIliUlllllM| 

BS1505.8.K74 

The  beacon  lights  of  prophecy, 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00012  4554 


